Full text of "Pushtimarg"

See other formats

OPINION

I am pleased to see that the Ph. D. thesis of Goswami Shri Raghunathlji Maharaj is
made available in print.

The thesis entitled "The system of Suddhadvaita Vedant of Sri Vallabhacharya"
was submitted to the M. S. University of Baroda in 1968 and the degree of Ph. D. was
awarded in 1968.

Shri Raghunathlji Maharaj was originally registered under the guidance of my Guru
Prof. G. H. Bhatt. But due to his sudden death, the pleasant task of guiding the Goswami
came to me by God's grace. In fact Goswamiji hails from the illustrious family of Sri
Mabaprabhuji himself belonging to the seventh house of Kamvan. As such my work was
very easy. Again the well known scholar and an authority on the philosophy of Sri
Vallabhacharya viz. Prof. N. K. Bambhania was his guide incognito. The present work is
an .authentic source of information about the Brahmavlda of H. H. Mahaprabhuji.

I congratulate Goswamiji when presenting an authentic exposition of the
philosophy of Sri Vallabhacharyaji in five chapters.

The value of the present work is further enhanced by my friend Shri S. N.
Bambhania, the worthy son of Prof. N. K. Bambhania by adding an introductory preface
about the author and by giving useful appendice at the end .

The present work is a useful and authentic exposition of the Suddhadvaita
philosophy. I therefore recommend that a Gujarati version of the present work which
would prove highly useful and! valuable work among of vaishnavas, especially the ladies
and other not conversant with the English language.

I am sure this work will be warmly received by the scholars as well as common
people.

Baroda

Sd /-

22-12-91

A.N.Jani

(i)

PARICAYIKA

It is a matter of great pleasure for the publication of the thesis titled :

"The system of Suddhadvaita vedanta of Sri Vallabhacharya's, otherwise known as
Brahmavada" by Dr. Raghunath Sharma, submitted to The Maharaja Sayajirao University
of Baroda (Gujarat State India) for the award of Ph. D. degree in the year 1968.

The scholar is popularly known as Goswami Shri Raghunathlalji Maharaj the
younger son of the worthy father: the Late Goswami 108 Shri Ramanlalji Maharaj-the
saptmesa among the Pushtimargiya Vaishnava sect and he is direct-male descendants of
Srt Vitthalesji the younger son of Mahaprabhu Srimad Vallabhacharya

Srimad Vallabhacharya was born in the latter half of the fifteenth century and
contributed to the religious and moral upliftment of the society in his time. At his credit is
one of his noblest contribution in the extension of Brahmavada-popularly known as
Suddhadvaita-Pure Monism the vedic school of philosophy by his literary work such as
Anubhasya critical commentary on Brahma Sutra-Aphorisms of Badarayan Vyas, the
commentary Subodhini, on several parts of Srimad Bhagavata Purana and various other
literary original works.

He established and propagated Akhanda Brahmavada, which was afterwards
popularised as 'Suddhadvaita', in which the vedantic principle 'Brahman' and is termed as
Krshna. Seva has been preached as the best idea of a follower human being.

For such a noble contribution, led with pious life, Srimad Vallabhacharya was
highly honoured as the fifth great Vedantacarya along with the four great others: namely
Sri Samkaracarya, Sri

Ramanujacarya, Sri Nimbarakacarya and Sri Madhvacarya. All are respected as
incarnations of Deities, and enjoy the high respect in the Indian Society.

(ii )

Srimad Vallabhacharya also enjoys this height of the respect as "Mahaprabhu
Vallabhacharya " among Vaishnavas in particular and among the Indian Society in
general and a very large number or persons follow His sect.

With this background about the scholar in short, let us have a brief sketch about
this work.

The subject-matter has been discussed at a considerable length with the logical
presentation of Sruti-quotations and the experiences of the great personalities of the
modern age. The effort is directed towards the better understanding about the currents of
knowledge- flowing in the oriental form of religion, and in the Western part of the world-in
the form of sciences, and for the synthesis of them for the great cause of humanity.

The subject matter is presented into five main chapters :

The preface starts with the supplementary character of science and religion-
through, with the contributions of the great personalities from both, and the subject comes
out from the thought of Swami Ramtirth from his lecture at Tokyo-Japan.

In the introductory chapter rational view for the subjective discussion has been
expressed; as the lack of the proper understanding of both, imperfect and adverse
understanding resulting into the fanatic practices have created unnecessary quarrels
among the follower groups, resulting into tensions and disturbances .in man- kind.

On the contrary, the aims of the pioneers are towards the total welfare of man-kind;
and hence the proper understanding becomes essential. In practice the followers should
refrain them- selves from abusing the principles of the others-which are not properly
known to them; and both sides should supplement their efforts to strive for the noble
cause of the world peace and the welfare of the man-kind. The acknowledgement to the
guide professors and other scholars and the notes on the frame -work, of the thesis
appear in the latter part.

(iii )

The second chapter deals with the chief authority on which Sri Vallabhacharya
relies. It has been pointed out towards the existence of the Unifying Principle-conveniently
termed as God and with many other names also. Sense organs have limitations for the
realisation of God, and hence Scriptural Authority and the experiences of saints are
recognised as authoritative for this subject; by{ the orthodox as well as the modern
scholars both. As the logic itself has its own limitations, rational interpretation of scriptures
becomes essential. The unique position of Guru-the spiritual guide has also been
emphasised as essential towards the initiation in the direction of the realisation.
Experiences of the great men stand in support.

The third chapter deals with the second less One, the Ultimate Reality. Definition of
the term, upnisadic supports to the same, experiences of the saints like Mahatma Gandhi
and scientists like Sir C. V. Raman and how it is known and felt are discussed.

The omnipresence, Omniscient and Omnigood characters are discussed with the
support of rational arguments, The necessity or the faith-as the rational foundation and
the Divine Grace are the
necessary means towards the Realisation.

The Oneness-without second-character has been discussed with the help of
worldly simple examples. Each character: intelligent, powerful, kind, goodness,
omnipresence-etc. of the Ultimate Reality,, the fact of the creation of the world, material,
cause and instrumental, cause-both in one, and the explanations of the other Acaryas
have been compared through the discussion at a fair length.

In the fourth chapter various other aspects such as : 'infinite' diverse names and
forms, Saccidananda forms, this miraculous powers, personal and impersonal character,
three Gunas-Sattva, Rajas, Tamas, are discussed. Views of other Acaryas are also
discussed. The views of Srlmad Vallabhacharya have also been compared with the views
of Sri Aurobindo Ghosh. Because of the rational conception about Ultimate Reality, and
its effect on the Indian religion resulted into tolerance-are also pointed 001. The
discussion

(iv)

has the support of the laws of thoughts. The creation of this world is the manifestation of
the Ultimate Reality, as a mere sport.

In the fifth chapter animate souls, inanimate objects, their participation in this divine
play, a short hint to the ideal life of Srlmad Vallabhacharya and his worthy son Sri
Vitthalesa have been pointed out with the final conclusion of the subject in the last
,chapter of .recapitulation.

Appendices are framed in the supports of the discussions, and .the abbreviations
of the sources.

The original literature on the subject appears in Sanskrit and Vrajabhasa-an old
dialectic form of Hindi, which has remained a predominant and common current language
in India and nowadays It has also been published in the provincial languages of India like
Gujarati etc..

In order to make this publication more useful, detailed contents .of the index,
subject index and quotation-index have been framed for the ease of reference work.

Ours are the efforts of human limitation, but presented into His divine lotus-feet of
the Almighty Ultimate Reality, just as a small petal of flower. May he accept and kindly
look at.

Mahaprabhu Srlmad Vallabhacharyaji Sri Vitthalnatthji. the .descendents and also
their pious followers will kindly favour us forgetting our errors if any.

(S. N. BAMBHANIA)

'"Champaranya" SHANTILAL N.

BAMDHANIA

Opp. Akashdip flats M. Sc. M. Phd. (1st

class)

Behind Khadayta Colony, LL. B.

Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-6
(v)

PREFACE

All the mundane phenomena are the transcendental supreme self. He, the
Supreme Being, is the creator & He creates Himself only. He, the Supreme Self, is the
sustainers & He sustains Himself only. He, the Supreme Lord, is the destroyer & He
destroys Himself only (I).

Whenever, however, wherever, by or through whatever, out of whatever, for
whatever, of whatever, to whatever; in the material form or conscious form or divine form,
whatever happens-it is all in all the Lord Himself (2).

The above quoted two passages sound like a poetry, but they are not written
merely to give an expression to a devotional imagination of a poet. Rather they should be
regarded as a great poem that strives to synthesise the different intellectual philosophies
that .bewilder our mind with mutual contradictions. And this synthesis too is not a
subterfuge to subjugate or enfold the other systems of philosophy, into one's own system
of thought, for making a claim of being all-encompassing universal philosophy. These two
passages are from the writings of Mahaprabhu Sri Vallabhacarya. the revivalist of the
Shuddhadvaita Brahmavada system of Vedanta.

Mabaprabhu's sole interest in this framework of philosophical system lies in it's
usefulness to meet the demand of devotion par excellence for the Lord Krsna. According
to Mahaprabhu, this devotion is neither merely a divine relishment of the godhood Krsna
nor is it merely a realisation of the all-pervasive powers or attributes of the Brahman. For
Mahaprabhu, Krsna is both a divine person as well as an omnificient-omnipresent-
omnicient & omnipotent power. Therefore, according to Mahaprabhu, an ideal devotee
has to relish Brahman as Krsna and realise Krsna as Brahman (3).

(vi)

Mahaprabhu says-"This world is to be realised as a part or a form of God but it
should not be relished as God (4)."

We, certainly, cannot relish any single musical note but any two musical notes of
mutually contradictory sounds indeed come into a charmful harmony in a sweet song!

For Mahaprabhu, Krsna is both; transcendental & immanent too. He is the
supreme Being Consciousness & Bliss. He is all- pervasive, therefore system of
Suddhadvaita Vedanta is also a pursuit of understanding how His all-pervasive unity
encompasses all the possible phenomena proposed by the other systems of thought.
They are supposed as either power or form identical with the essence of the Supreme
Being (5).

Yes, the God is all-pervasive, therefore, in every vision of divinity, some divine
perspective is present (6).

According to some thinkers, though the two tracks of train never truly converge, yet
the law of perspective produces such subjective feelings within us. Thus what we see is
merely an illusion & the said law amply proves the ultimate falsity & visual experience.

As a matter of fact, in spite of the absence of any mental, subjective or cognitive
activity, the law of perspective maintains it's own objective validity. This is adequately
supported by the photo- graphic reproduction of any landscape by a camera, which does
not possess mind. Therefore, truly speaking, the so called law of perspective is not so
much concerned with how do we perceive, but how a visual object appears in spatial
relation with the other objects. Because the visual object appears exactly in similar
fashion before both: the eyes of conscious being as well as the lens of lifeless camera.
This takes us for considering one more important issue of the Kantian duality between 'the
thing as it is' & 'the thing as it appears'.

Here, according to different Vedantic theories viz. Vivartavada. Vikrta-
parinamavada & Avikrta-parinimaviida, we get the different solutions.

(vii)

The Kevaladvaitins propose Vivartavada. Therefore according to it, Adhisthana i.e.
'the thing as it is' is absolutely one: [A & not- (not-A) ].Thus 'the thing as it appears' is a
false appearance, as the serpent falsely appears 0[l the rope due to darkness,
resemblance & the fear of serpent in person who perceives it.

The other possibility is of Vikrta-parinamavada. According to it, 'the thing as it is'
e.g. milk, after being modified as curd, truely appears to be curd. But after the
modification i.e., from milk to curd, if Someone misconsiders the curd as milk, nobody
would admit such consideration as valid knowledge.

Therefore Mahaprabhu proposes a different theory of Avikrta- parinamavada,
wherein substance & it's modifications are identical with each other, as in the philosophy
of Spinoza; Therefore 'the thing as it is' is unknowable i[l manner of 'the thi[lg as it
appears,' before it is modified in that particular form. But if in the process of modification,
the essential identity is not lost, then the relation between 'the thing as it is' & 'the thing as
it appears' cannot be defined in terms of [ A & not-(not-A) ], but it has to be defined in
terms (A=B). Here 'A' stands 'the thing as it is' & 'B' stands for 'the thing as it appears'.

.Mahaprabhu supports his theory by giving the example of the gold & the necklace
made of it. To give a little clear explanation, we can also think of an antique statue made
of gold. To an ignorant gold thief, it may appear simply as a gold & to a historian as an
antique ,of much higher value than a mere piece of gold. Neither of these two
appearances can be explained away in terms Adhisthan & Vivarta. Therefore the relation
that subsists between the substance gold & the antique statue cannot be explained in
terms of considering the gold as a real substance & statue as a false modification. I

Thus the Brahman, before being modified as the world is un- knowable-
indescribable 'the thing as it is' in very Kantian fashion. ,

(viii )

But after being, modified as the world; as gold is modified into the form of an antique or an
ornament, it really becomes the world knowable as well as describable. The Brahman
becomes the world without loosing it's essential identity. Therefore 'the thing as it is' viz.
Brahman is identical with 'the thing as it appears' viz. the world.

According to Kevaladvaitins, it can be argued that an absolutely real thing can
never go under the process of any changes. But we have to consider the whole issue
more carefully.

For the sake of argument, think of any object which is merely phenomenally real,
with all of it's changes also being of same nature, e.g. the transformation of milk into curd.
Here the milk as well as it's transformation both are phenomenally real. So there is no
need to degrade the changes to the scale lower than that of the substance which
undergoes the transformation. It is not the case there that the milk is phenomenally real
while it's transformation into .curd is phenomenally real. Nor milk can be regarded as
phenomenally real while the curd as mere false appearance. A question of .temporal
distinction can be brought into notice for emphasising the .duality between the milk as it
was & the milk as it, after the .changing into form of curd, appears. In such case, we
would like to propose to concentrate upon the nature of the quantum theory: light is both
wave as well as particles. Here in this case, what can be regarded as the light as it is &
the light as it appears ?

Therefore it is inevitable here to make one more distinction as to between what 'the
thing as it is' is & what 'the human logic .demands the thing to be' is.

The laws of thought are the prime necessity for any intellectual 'thinking; but can
our intellect be regarded as the sole criterion of objective reality ? We certainly can not
intellectually grasp how something being wave can be particles too. We have simply to
.observe or presume how the light behaves surrationally !

Mahaprabhu Sri Vallabhacarya considers Brahman also a supra-rational
phenomenon i.e. neither rational nor irrational one.

Mahaprabhu emphatically clarifies that Brahman, is all, therefore it is full of mutually
contradictory attributes. Such phenomenon can sometimes be misunderstood as irrational
concept, but this is merely a blind faith in reason. As a matter of fact, Brahman is supra-
rational phenomenon, therefore, all philosophies can be regarded as describing some
partial truth of Brahman. At the same time, no philosophy can be a total description of the
totality of the truth:

Mahaprabhu, therefore, also confirms that any absolutistic claim of any philosophy
is bound to be absolutely false. Yet even in this respect, Mahaprabhu's opinion is that
even such absolutely false approach is ultimately caused or inspired by the God Himself,
nay never by setan !

Mahaprabhu says-"Although all the understandings i.e. philosophies are caused or
inspired by the God but the thinkers, due to ignorance of the God, uphold their respective
systems of thought as the full & final description of the ultimate reality. Some think -there
is no God, others think-actions or rituals alone are God, some consider Him as 'mere
creator' while other consider Him nothing else than their own selves. These totalistic
claims are prevalent due to ignorance & total reliance upon their own hypotheses (8)".
This means that there is some truth in every theory of different systems of thought.

In brief, this is the approach of Mahaprabhu Sri Vallabhacarya's philosophy. It is
very unlike the approach of Sunyavadins who say that the theory of Sunya is not to
uphold the Sunya as the ultimate reality, but to get rid of all the theories, including itself
about the ultimate reality. Mahaprabhu upholds the theory of Brahmavada not to falsify
other theories, least can it be said to be for self-denial. For Mahaprabhu, Brahman is full
of contradictory attributes, therefore all the contradictory theories are
partially true including his own theory of Suddhadvait Brahmavada.

(x)

t am glad that Goswamy Sri Raghunathlal (Dadabhai)'s Ph D. thesis is being
published. It gives quite lucid exposition of the philosophy of Mahaprabhu & I have no
doubt that it will enhance the interest in the readers of different systems of Vedanta.

14th March, 92 - Goswamy

Syammanobar

Bombay

1.. From Sarvanirnaya. Nibandha. of Mahaprabhu Sri Vallabhacarya:

2, From Sastrarth Nibandha of Mahaprabhu :

3, Sastrartha :

4, From Subodhini by Mahaprabhu :

5, Siddhantamuktavali by Mahaprabhu :

6, Subodhini

7, Sastrartha :

8, Subodhini

(xi)

OBLIGATORY

I am delighted to thank Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda for the kind
permission for the printing and publication of my Thesis.

I can not help acknowledging the indebtedness to my brother Sri Syam Manoharji
the worthy son of my honourable Guru Sri Dixitaji Maharaj of Bada Mandir Bombay for his
proper guidance and also performing the editorial and proofreading work in spite of
remaining very busy in the several pious activities of Vallabha Sampradaya.

I am highly obliged to the late prof. N. K. Bambhania H. K. College Ahmedabad for
his guidance and as a result my thesis has seen the light of the day,

I am also thankful to Padmasri Mahamahimopadhaya K. K. Sastri as well as the
well known scholar Sri Badrinath Sastri for giving valuable suggestions time to time.

Heartily thanking to S. N. Bambhania for preparing the Parichayika, the detailed
Contents of the index, the subject index, the quotation-index and the index of maxims for
the ease of reference work of my Thesis.

Finally my hearty blessings to Sri Narottam Bhatia for the printing job of my Thesis.

I am sure that my humble endeavour will be warmly received by the people all over
the world. I dedicate this petal of my Thesis in the lotus feet of Sri Madanmohan Prabhu.

To end in good my inexhaustible prostrations before my graceful Sri
Madanmohanji, Sri Vallabhacarryacarna, Sri Vithaleswara- prabhu, Sri Ghansyam-Prabhu
as well as honourable parents of mine.

Raghunath

Go5wami

(xii)

DETAILED CONTENTS

Part-1 Paricayika

Opinions

Part-2 Thesis

Preface:

Page

Supplementary character of science and religion 1

Chapt.-I Introduction 3-7

Para-1-2 Pioneer's aims and efforts 3

3 One spirit behind all religions 4

4,5,4 Conclusion 5

7 Points of technical importance 7

Chapt-11 Authority 8-33

Para-I Chief authority. & 8

Field of philosophy

2-3 Field of sciences 9

4 Ancient views 10

5 Efforts of scholars and spiritual scientists 11

6 'God'a term for unity 12

7 Rational view 12

8 Orthodox view Words of God or prophets as 13

the only means

9 Positive views on the subject 13

10-11 'Guru'the spiritual 14

12 guide-and initiation

13 To be a better follower 16

14-15

Badariyan. indispensability of revelation

Vedas-as absolute

authority-orthodox view

Other three works

(xiii)

Page

18-19 Rationalistic view and beliefs 19

20 Conflicting views in science and religion 20

21 Conflicts among various religions 21

22 Rationality and need of tolerance in behaviours 24

23 Limitations of one set of Laws to others 25

24 Need of faith. 27

25 Faith in belief 29

26 Need to accept the genuine portion of scriptures 30

27,28,29 Vallabhacarya's Attitude towards scriptural authority 31

Cbapt-lll Ultimate Reality [34.:.61)

Para-I Brahmavada-def. 34

2, 3 ' God'-theological term, detailed discussion rely on vedic scriptures

4 Suddhadvait def, 35

5 Upanisads-support 35

6 Enlighten human mind as source 36

7 Ultimate Principle-intelligent, powerful and kind 38

8 Experiences of renowned persons 39

9 Bible supports 40

10 Known by mental apparatus 40

11 Dogmatic-methods by Indian philosophers 42

12 Nothing more beyond this to know 43

13 Knowledge as power 44

14 Combination-of knowledge and power 44

Goodness

Omnipresence

Faith

18-19

Vallabhacarya's view

God-one without second

Discussion on Oneness

Without second

23-24

Fact of Creation, details

Material and instrumental cause. .

Problem of evil

Different views

Vallabhacarya's solution

Partiality or cruelty

Supports

Summary

Chap- IV

Other Aspects

62-96

Para-I

Various Aspects

2-3

Infinite-all comprehensive

Diverse-names and forms

Sacidanand

Many fold ness

7 Miraculous powers 74

8 Samkaracarya's view 77

9 Ramanujacarya's view 81

10-11 Vallabhacarya's basis and view 83

12 Endowed with all divine qualities 90

13 Ultimate Reality as personal and Impersonal 92

14 Creation of this World is mere sport 96

Chap-V Two Sub-categories 98-100

Para-1 Animate souls and Inanimate objects 98

2 Souls-active or contemplative: life ideally 99

lead by Vallabhacarya and Vitthalesa

.Chap-V ( Recapitulation 101-102 Para-I One Religion 101

2 God all comprehensive simplicity 101

3 Master simplicity transformed into vast complexity 102

Part-3

Appendix I 103

Persons and Authors

Appendix II 105

Abbreviations & Books

Appendix III 109

Sources of Quotations. Subject Index

Quotation-Index

Subject Index 113

Index of Inalation 123

Proverbs and Numinous

124

PREFACE

Fortunately, there have appeared men, both in the East as well as in the West,
who have appreciated and absorbed the Cultures, of both the East and the West; e.g.
Swami Vivekananda and Swami Rama Tirtha in the East, and Romain Rolland and
Aldous Huxley in the West. The general Culture of the West values the matter more than
the Spirit, that of the East values the Spirit more than the matter. But our body has both.
They are like our two eyes.. We can carryon our work with one eye no doubt; but for the
sake of full perspective and also for that of beauty and symmetry both are needed. In the
Materialistic Culture of the West, we have the spirit of adventure, the element of honest,
incessant Jabour, the open-eyed rationalistic bent of mind, and in short, all the qualities
needed for materialistic progress. But at the same time, there is no consciousness of the
One Spirit enthroned in the hearts of all. Thus, there is no sincere regard for others there
in the West. If it is at all to be found, it is only as a means to an end, which is one's own
materialistic gain. This is true at least in case of those who no more share their traditional
Christian or Jewesh faith. It is all right as long as it serves the latter. No sooner does it
come in conflict with it, than it is thrown over-board. And, in consequence, there are cut¬
throat competition, mutual intolerance, and the mentality of destruction of the opponent.
And these three are the great impediments in the way of Universal Peace, the avowed'
end of all. This lack to be found in the Materialistic Culture is. supplied by the Spiritualistic
Culture of the East. The same Spirit dwells in us as well as in others. This Spirit is One
Mighty Organism, and all living creatures whether human or sub-human are its. various
organs. They are like limbs of our body. The hand instinctively runs to the help of the leg if
a mosquito sits on the latter to bite it. Some such instinctive help to others in their hour of
need is needed for the Universal Peace, the avowed goal of all.

The rationale for some such regard for, and the consequent help to, others is supplied by
the Spiritualistic Philosophy of the East. In a lecture on "The Secret of Success" at the
College of Commerce in Tokyo, Swami Rama Tirtha had said: "The Religion that Rama
brings to Japan is virtually the same as was brought centuries ago by Buddha's followers.
But the same religion requires to be dealt with from an entirely different standpoint, ~o suit
it to the needs of the present age. It requires to blazoned forth in the light of Western
Science and Philosophy." That the present Thesis is animated by this Spirit will be clear to
anyone who happens to read it. One American News Paper had written :about Swami
Rama Tirtha that he stood where philosophy and practical science met. -something of the
sort can be said about this Thesis too.

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1. A word about the way of treatment of the subject, which is not altogether untouched in
the past, is at the outset not out of place.

2. The tremendous progress made by Positive Sciences, both physical as well as
psychological, has shaken, the very foundation of religious dogmas giving rise to the two
opposite camas. Scientific fanatics have dubbed aside as blind belief anything and
everything that cannot be demonstrated. Religious fanatics, on the other hand, owing to
their mental inertia, have not only failed to [grasp the true scientific spirit, but have left no
stone unturned in persecuting any person who happened to profess a belief different from
their own, regardless of the fact whether :such a person pursued science or belonged to a
different religion, or merely to a different denomination of their own religion. Their
pioneers had delight in being persecuted by their opponents; these followers delighted in
persecuting their opponents. The former loved and forgave their opponents; these latter
had hated and harassed them. The result is the alienation of the best brains. It is not the
religious pioneers but the religious fanatics that have brought Religion into disrepute. The
new generation is not irreligious at heart. It has been made irreligious by religious
persecutors of the past as well as the present. The common run of men looks to facts
which are concrete and not to principles which are abstract. They think, if religious
persons are bad, religions are bad. And thinking so they leave Religion altogether. And in
leaving Religion in this way they are deprived of even the

best elements of Religion. There is nothing absolutely bad in either Religion or Science.
What is bad is the ignorance of the true nature of both. What is bad is unwarranted belief.
What is bad is hypocrisy and not sincerity in either. There is nothing nobler than sincerity.
True Science and true Religion need fear nothing. Why should they ? Why should true
light fear darkness ? Fearlessness is the foremost among divine virtues. If anything is to
be; feared it is fear itsel. True faith and fearlessness always go together . True faith is
eternal. It is never shaken. " A faith which cannot survive collision with the truth is not
worth many regrets" says. A. C. Clarke, an eminent British scientist.

3. There is a marked difference between a body and a soul. Though individual bodies die
as a rule, the, soul animating them has survived through ages. And it is this continuity of
the soul alone that can account for the steady progress of the human race. What is true of
the individual bodies and the universal soul is., equally true of the individual religions and
the Universal Religious Spirit. Their outward forms constitute their bodies only. The
inward animating Spirit is everywhere the same. That is why Dr. RadhaKrishnan has said
somewhere in his inimitable style "Religions must die if Religion is to live." By 'Religions'
he means outward religious forms and beliefs. By 'Religion' he means the one Religious
Spirit animating all individual religions. The importance of the out- ward body lies in so far
as it embodies the inward soul. The out- ward body without the inward soul is dead
subject to disintegration and decay. Fanatics are familiar only with the outward forms. Of
the inward animating Spirit they know nothing. And it is only for the outward forms that
they fight. The really faithful alone know what the inward animating Spirit is. The truly
faithful followers of one religion never quarrel with those of another. They not only respect
but also love each other. And this is always so in spite of the fact that on account of their
different practices they cannot physically

mix together. And, incidentally it may be mentioned that, generally, just as there are no
souls to be found without bodies, so there are no religions to be found without outward
religious practices. And just as, in our general course, we do tolerate the bodies of other
persons, so we ought to tolerate the outward practices of other religions. And the future
Universal Religion is sure to take some such form. And it is the spirit of such Universal
Religion that has inspired the following words of Swami Vivekananda :

"I accept all religions that were in the past, and worship with "them all; I worship God with
anyone of them We take in all that has been in the past, enjoy the light of the present,
and open 'every window of the heart for all that will 'come in the future. Salutations to all
the prophets of the past to all the great ones or the present, and to. all that are to come in
the future. " And it is just because, in the religious system of Sri- Vallabhacarya, I have
found the elements of such a Universal Religion, that I have chosen it to be the subject of
my Thesis. And since the rational and the universally acceptable presentation of his
doctrines has been my sole aim, I have refrained from going into doctrinal details.

4. 1 cannot conclude this little Introduction without thankfully remembering my First Guide,
late Prof. G. H. Bhatt, the Chief Editor of the Critical Edition of Valmiki's Ramayana,
published by Oriental Institute, Baroda. When I approached him and expressed my wish
to write a thesis for my Ph. D. degree, his joy knew no bounds. It was he who very
enthusiastically suggested the topic for my Thesis He was a sincere devotee of Sri
Vallabhacarya, or his philosophical and religious system, and of his works. This sincere
devotion of his, though instinctive, was strongly nourished by his deep study thereof. It
was his pious wish to present to the intelligent world the tenets of this great Vaisnava
Vedantacarya, last in the line headed by such mighty personalities as Sri-Samkaracarya
and Sri Ramanujacarya Though he is not as widely known

as these two great Acaryas, he has all the qualities as would place him in their rank. He is
original, rational, comprehensive, catholic yet very humble. He flourished during the last
quarter of the fifteenth & the first quarter of the sixteenth century of the Christian Era. Like
other Vedantacaryas, he has to his credit a Bhasya on the BrahmaSutras, wherein we
find a thoroughly well-formulated system of Vedantic philosophy and religion. His
crowning work, however, is. his mighty and masterly commentary on Snmad-Bhagavata.
And this Srimad-Bhagavata ranks in importance with Ramayana and Mahabharata in
Indian religious literature. He openly declares that it was to write this commentary that
God had sent him to this, world of mortals. Moreover he openly declares that God
appeared in person before him and asked him to propagate his faith. Unfortunately, he
could not write this commentary on the whole of that work because of the repeated erders
from God to return. To these orders from God also he openly refers in one of his minor
works.8 That such phenomena are not unusual in India has been ably shown by
Christopher Isherwood in his work "Ramakrishna and His Disciples." Sri-valiabhacarya
has a very vast number of followers even today. He was a householder; and the writer of
the present Thesis has the great fortune of being his direct descendant, Among his
descendants there have been many learned persons who have enriched the philosophical
and religious literature of India.

5. Next I have sincerely to thank Dr. A, N. Janj, the Head of Sanskrit Department, the M.

5. University of Baroda, who .most sympathetically came to my help in my sad
bereavement caused by the sudden death of my First Guide, Prof. G. H. Bhatt, by very
willingly accepting to be my Guide in spite of his many preoccupations, and thus amply
facilitating my work.

6. Last but not the least, I cannot help acknowledging the deepest debt of gratitude I owe
to Sri Diksitji Maharaj

of Bada Mandir, Bombay, at present occupying a unique position among the direct
descendants Sri Vallabhacarya, because of his profound scholarship in the field of
Vedantic philosophy. .It is he who first initiated me into the philosophical tenets of Srl-
Vallabhacarya. It is he who has nourished me in this field as a mother does her child.
And it is no exaggeration to state that it is through his sheer grace that the work of this
Thesis has proceeded smoothly and that this Thesis has seen the light of the day. My
thousand prostrations before this mighty Guru of mine.

7. Now, I can very well conclude this little Introduction by mentioning a few points of
technical importance. The original Sanskrit Quotations have been given in translitertion,
the scheme whereof is the one current among the Oriental Scholars of today. They have
been given with a slight modification, so far as strict Sandhi rules are concerned, in order
to make them easily understandable. Mostly they are followed by a free, flowing, full, yet
faithful rendering thereof. In some places, where their rendering and substance practically
coincide, they are followed by their substance. But now here do they occur without their
meaning being made clear. As to the Indication of the source of these as well as other
quotations, it has been done separately in an Appendix and not where they occur, in order
that the body of the Thesis may have a smooth appearance. The bold typed of certain
important portions thereof plus the additional punctuation marks and the additional words
put therein, one to emphasise and the other to make the sense clear, are entirely due to
me. As to the presentation of the material, it has been throughout rational, at times
proceeding from the very first principles. The language employed is simple and direct.
Every effort has been made to make the meaning as clear as possible. As this work is
intended for the general public, I have taken a little liberty with the use of certain
philosophical terms, which the strict students of philosophy will kindly pardon.

CHAPTER II
AUTHORITY

1. The chief authority on which Sri-Vallabhacarya relies for his System of Suddhadvaita
Vedanta, otherwise known as Brahmavada as contrasted with the Mayavada as Sri
Samkaracarya, is undoubtedly the Vedas, especially the Upanisadic portions thereof. But
before we deal with it, it will be well for us to consider certain general matters relating to
this system. This system obviously belongs to the sphere of metaphysics, i.e., that branch
of philosophy which deals with the Ultimate Principle. The phenomena presented to our
sense are, as all thinkers know, impermanent; not only impermanent but also many. We
know from our own experience that behind our thoughts which are both impermanent and
many, there lies one permanent thinking subject. This tempts us to think that it is also
possible that the external phenomena which are impermanent and many may also have
one permanent principle behind them. In spite of this temptation in that direction we know
it for certain that our external sense organs never inform us about some such Ultimate
Principle. Nevertheless the internal demand for some such Ultimate Principle is always
there. Deep thinkers, past as well as present, have always tried to find out some such
Principle unifying the diversified phenomena, which are not only many but at times even
incoherent. Scientists in the external sphere and philosophers in the internal one have
tried their level best to discover simple laws governing this diversified phenomena. And
inciden- tally we may say that as history of Science and Philosophy clearly shows, their
efforts have not been entirely wasted.

They have certainly met with some amount of success. But that is not our point here. The
most material point here is the hankering after some such unifying principle. Take, for
instance, what Dr. Annie Besant writes in her Autobiography:

"The first step which leaves behind the idea of a limited and personal God, an
extra-cosmic Creator, and leads the student to the point whence Atheism and Pantheism
diverge, is the recognition that a profound unity of substance underlies the infinite
diversities of natural phenomena, the discernment of the One beneath the Many. This
was the step I had taken before my first meeting with Charles Bradlaugh, and I had
written :

" It is manifest to all who will take the trouble to think steadily, that there can be
only one eternal and underived substance, and that matter and spirit must, therefore, only
be varying manifestations of this One substance. ...Matter is in its constituent elements,
the same as spirit; existence is one, however manifold in its phenomena; life is one,
however multiform in its evolution. As the heat of the coal differs from the coal itself, so do
memory, perception, judgment, emotion, and will differ from the brain which is the
instrument of thought. But nevertheless they are all equally products of the one sole
substance varying only in their conditions."1

2. Leaving this abstract field of philosophy, if we come down to the concrete field of
physical science, it has been demonstrated beyond all doubt that all matter, however
diversified in its manifestations, is ultimately constituted of the same elementary particles.

3. From what has been stated above it win be amply clear that the enlightened human
soul in its innermost depth bankers after some simplicity likely to underlie tbe vast com¬
plexity of the universe, external as well as internal. And what simplicity can there be other
than unity? It is in this way that

we can arrive at unity instinctively. And Suddhadvaita means nothing else but unity pure
and simple. But will this instinc. tive approach suffice ? Will it satisfy rational thinkers,
whose motto is "No trusting without testing" and who in this age of universal doubt would
take nothing for granted ? So let us see if we can find anything pointing out in this
direction.

4. For this let us first turn to physicists and their latest theory and about the constitution of
matter. Some of the Greek philosophers, like their oriental counterparts, the Vaisesikas,
believed that atoms are the ultimate constituents of matter. But this belief of theirs was
instinctive rather than scientific in the modern sense of the term. The latest scientific
research has, however, confirmed this view of theirs. Nevertheless, their approach was
not strictly scientific so let us turn to modern scientists, especially, physicists. These latter
study the constitution and the working of the external universe. Their attitude is strictly
objective. They have no preconceived notions to mislead them. Their sincerity is beyond
reproach. Their sacrifice of material comforts is almost ascetic. They proceed with as fer
assumptions as possible. They have built their theoretical structure on a few fundamental
laws of thought and the solid facts which repeately and invariably present themselves
befor:. their sense-organs and their instruments which are perfectly faultless. They are
precise to a point. They believe first in what is unmistakably presented before them, and
next in that without which what they have thus observed cannot be satisfactorily
explained. For instance, Newton, the Sage among Scientists, believed in the falling down
of an apple and in the gravitational pull by the earth without which the phenomenon of this
falling down of the apple could not be satisfactorily explained. And even when he
extended his theory of gravitation to other parts of the universe, every step of his was
strictly cautious. He went on, no doubt, but strictly checking every step of his.

Coming to the point, let us see to what this strictly scientific method has brought
them. Their latest discoveries point to the fact that all external matter is ultimately
constituted of elementary particles, which are nothing but a form of energy, thus
establishing that matter and energy are in the ultimate analysis but one, and thus
substantiate what the ancient philosophers had roughly arrived at instinctively or
speculatively.

5. When, however, we come to the sphere of what is within, both our hands and tongues
are tied. We have no scientists and research scholars worth the name. Such philo¬
sophers as Aldous Huxley had tried to explore this field. But they had not advanced
sufficiently enough to demonstrate the results of their research. At best they could only
hold forth rational explanations for spiritual beliefs. Such explanations may to some extent
satisfy spiritually-minded persons. Nevertheless, their appeal is certainly not universal, It
is being reported that Yogins have achieved considarable progress in the internal sphere.
But, unfortunately, they do not come out in public. If some venture to come out, they
miserably fail. We may have at times a solitary instance of a true spiritual scientist like
Swami Srl-Ramakrsna Paramahamsa, the Guru of Swami Vivekananda. But such
instance are very very rare. That he was .a real spiritual scientist was amply clear to those
that had come in personal contact with him. He repeatedly warned his disciples never to
take anything on trust. Swami Vivekananda was the last man to take anything on trust. So
steeped was he in western speculative philosophy. Not only had Sri-Ramakrsna
Paramahamsa repeatedly asked Swami Vivekananda to test him (l.e., Swami Srl-
Ramakrsna Paramahamsa), but the latter had actually tested the former, and the former
had come out of that test unscathed. Coming to the point, we, in the present, state of
things, in all humility admit our weakness in this sphere; and in spite of our desire to the
contrary, we have

to rely, unwilli8gly of course, on the views of ancient masters. Nevertheless, we shall, in
this matter, be as rational as possible, and perhaps the least dogmatic.

6. As stated above our philosophical instinct points in the direction of Ultimate Unity,
whereas our intellect refuses to believe in it. For we perceive diversity everywhere. This is
not the only thing. The dictum "Variety is the spice of life" shows its desirability too.
Moreover, without this diversity, all our course of conduct would come to a standstill. We
can- not conceive how any activity would at all be possible without this diversity. To make
dealing possible we are, moreover, compelled to create diversity where there is none: e.g.
in the case of currency notes of the same denomination which are all alike, we have to
number them and thus create diversity; or, in the case of oceanic water which is the same
everywhere, we have to demarcate it in different continental parts. Is, then, 'Unity the
Ultimate Principle or Diversity? Incidentally it may be mentioned that the quarrel whether
anything like God exists or does not exist is a height of folly. For, after all, 'God' is a
convenient term for some such unifying Ultimate Principle. Moreover, let it be mentioned
that this term 'God' will be freely employed in the sense of this unifying Ultimate Principle
whenever and wherever it will be felt convenient to do so in this dissertation.

7. That reason by itself cannot lead us to such an Ultimate Principle, convenientlv termed
'God', is clear not only to orthodox philosophers but also to clear-headed sincere free¬
thinkers, Take, for instance, the following excerpt from Dr. Annie Besant's Autobiography,
Before she became an ardent. Theosophist, she was a devout disciple of Charles
Bradlaugh, a British free-thinker of spotless character and of highly noble nature.

She writes :

"Proceeding to search whether any idea of God was attainable, I came to the
conclusion that evidence of the existence

12 .

of a conscious Power was lacking, and that the ordinary proofs offered were inconclusive;
that we could grasp phenomena and. no more. ...Our faculties fail us when we try to
estimate the Deity, and we are betrayed into contradictions and absurdities.

"This refusal to believe without evidence, and the declara- tion that anything
'behind phenomena' is unknowable to man as at present constituted -these are the two
chief planks of the Atheistic platform, as Atheism was held by Charles Bradlaugh and
myself."2

8. Now, let us see what an orthodox philosopher our Sutrakara Sri Badrayana Vyas has
to say on the point. In his Tarkiprati-thlna Sutra3 he bas categorically declared that so far
as the search of the Ultimate Principle is concerned the human reason by itself is futile.
Objects are of two types- those that lie within the range of sense-organs including mind,
and those that lie beyond this range. Omniscient God alone knows the latter. Or he whom
such God favours can know them. As for the rest, faith pure and simple in the words of
God or of some such Prophet is the only means. In the case of such objects reason
simply misleads. Reason may go a great way in the case of the objects of the first type,
but never in that of the second.

9. Having considered the negative side of the question, let us now turn to the positive
side. Here, too, the following paragraphs from Dr. Annie Besant's. Autobiography will be
of great help :

"Thus was ushered in 1889, the year to me never-to-be forgotten, in which I found my way
'Home,' and had the priceless good fortune of meeting, and of becoming the pupil of, H P.
Blavatsky :

" ...Into the darkness shot a ray of light -A.P . 'Occult World,' with its wonderfully
suggestive letters

expounding not the supernatural but a nature under law, wider than I had dared to
conceive. I added Spiritualism to my studies, experimenting privately, finding the
pheomena indubitable, but the spiritualistic explanation of them incredible.:

" ...I know, by personal experiment, the Soul exists, and that my Soul, not my body, is
myself; that it can leave the body at will; that it can, disembodied, reach and learn from
living human teachers, and bring back and impress on the physical brain that which it has
learned; that this process of transferring consiousness from one range of being, as it
were, to another, is a very slow process, during which the body and brain are gradually
correlated with the subtler form which is essentially that of the Soul, and that my own
experience of it, still so imperfect, so fragmentary, when compared with the experience of
the highly trained, is like the first struggles of a child learning to speak compared with the
perfectoratory of the practised speaker; that consciousness, so far from being dependent
on the brain, is more active when freed from the gross forms of matter than when
encased within them : that the great Sages spoken of by H. P. Blavatsky exist; that they
wield powers and possess knowledge before which our control of Nature and knowledge
of her ways is but as child's play.

10. From the above citation it becomes clear that we need not get disheartened if our
reason leads us no far. The Revelation .is there. Inspired souls do appear on this earthly
plane from time to iime. They are our best guides. They are there to lead us in the right
direction. Their human limitations will in no way come in our way. In spite of their human
limitations, they posess limitless powers of lifting us up to the limitless. What is needed on
our part is whole-hearted and even blind faith, which is of greater service to us than an
open- eyed one workin.g with .caution. An analogy will drive the truth home. One person
sits in a motor-car. Another runs along with

it minding his every step. .Who will profit more? And in this connection I can do nothing
better than quote Sri Aurobindo Ghosh, one of the great modern spiritual aspirants, who
had direct experience of Ultimate Reality in this very life. He writes :

'It is not the human defects of the Guru that can stand in the way when there is the
psychic opening, confidence, and Surrender. The Guru is the channel or the
representation or the manifestation of the Divine, according to the measure of his
personality or his attainment; but whatever he is, it is the Divine that one opens to, in
opening to him; and if something is determined by the power of the channel, more is
determined by the inherent and intrinsic attitude of the receiving conscious- ness, an
element that come:; out in the surface mind as simple trust or direct unconditional self¬
giving, and once that is ! there, the essential things can be gained even from one who
seems to others than the disciple an inferior spiritual source, and the rest wilt grow up in
the sadhak of itself, by the Grace of the Divine, even if the human being in the Guru
cannot give it. ...In my o"'n case, I owe the first decisive turn of my inner lire to one who
was infinitely inferior to me in intellect, education, capacity, and by no meaDs spiritually
perfect or supreme; but having seen a power behind him and (having) decided to turn
there for help I gave myself entirely into his hands and followed with an automatic
passivity the guidance. He himself was astonished and said to others that he had never
met anyone before who could surrender himself so 3bsolutely and without reserve or
question to the guidance of the helper. The result was a series of transmuting experie¬
nces of such a radical character that he was unable to follow and had to tell me to give
myself up in future to the Guide within with the same completeness of surrender as I had
shown to the human channel, I give this example to show how these -things work; it is not
in the calculated way the human reason -wants to lay down, but by a more mysterious
and greater law.'S.

11. The above citation will thus amply justify the Upani~adic dictum, to be found at the
end of the Svetasvataropanisad, that he alone will be able to grasp thoroughly these
spirituat truths, who has absolute faith in God as well as in Guru.6..

12. Moreover, from these citations, it will be amply clear that the Ka~hopani~ad dictum,
namely, The Ultimate Reality being hjgbly:, subtle is beyond the ken of human reason,
and, as such, can never be known except through a proper spiritual guide,7 and the
Ch§ndogyopani~ad dictum, namely. He who has a spiritual' guide alone knows It,8 are
not altogether without justification. To drive the truth of this doctrine home, the
Ch'andogyopanisad further employs the following parable :

A person was taken out completely blind-folded from his native land and was set free still
blind -folded in a distant alien land. He ran here and there. But such efforts of his were of
no avail in taking him back to his native country.. Somehow, by God's grace, a good
person who happened to pass by, took pity on him, removed the bandage from his eyes
and showed him the direction in which lay his native land. Then alone it was possible for
him to get back to his native country.9

The case with us is the same. The life of Spirit is our native life. Somehow or other, we
have strayed away from it. We do not know in what direction it lies. We grope here and
there, but find nothing. If, by God's grace, some Guru takes pity on us and removes our
ignorance by pointing out the right direction, then alone there is some possibility of our
returning to it and of consequently finding perdurable peace. Thus revelation and not
reaso- is our final resort in matters spiritual'.

13. Though revealed scriptures may be different for different religions, yet the fact that
they are the starting points is

common to all religions. Our parents are different. Nevertheless we have derived our life
from them. Because our parents are different, that does not mean that we are children
and others are not. This equally applie.j to all religions. Prophets and their teachings are
like parents and religious followers are like children. There may be people having no
religion worth the name. Missionaries may give them their religion and may make them
happy. This is certainly a laudable task. This is as good and philanthropic a task as
finding out a husband for an unmarried girl. But to go beyond this is not good. Getting
husbands for unmarried girls is one thing. But to ask married girls and even those that
have far advanced in married life to leave their husbands because they (i.e. the
husbands) are, somehow or other, believed by us to be bad is quite another. Those that
have got a real religion and have far advanced in it should never be asked to leave it.
When such persons are asked to do so, the true missionary spirit degenerats into blind
bigotry. That is why Svaml Vivekinanda wanted Hindus to be better Hindus, Christians to
be better Christians, and Moham- medans to be better Mohammedans.

14. Returning to the point let us remind ourselves that, in matters spiritual, books of
revelations are our first and the last resort. That is why Badrayana Vyasa, the author of
the Brahmasutra, in his very famous Srutestu Sabdamula Sutra, boldly declares that there
is no harm whatsoever in immolating Reason at the alter of Revelation. And
Sri.Vallabhacarya, too, in his Bhasya on the Janmadi Sutra, with equal boldness states
that one is welcome to him if one: has absolute faith in Revelation and never
otherwise12;dan further states that because Revelation has declared so, it cannot be
otherwise13.

15. After thus establishing not only the importance but also the indispensibility of
Revelation, let us now turn to which

revealed scriptures Srl-Vallabhacarya relies on. He, in his TattvadJpa-Nibandha,14
enumerates them as follows :

The Vedas, the words of the Lord in the Bhagavadgltl:, the Aphorisms of Badarayana
Vyasa, and the Inspired Portions of the Bhagavata. As to their mutal relations, he states
that the succeeding work amplifies the meaning of the preceding one.14 Thus, being at
the root, the Vedas are the most important.

16. Now let us consider what these Vedas are according to the Orthodox Belief.
According to this Belief, the embody the Eternal Truth in Eternal Words. Not only the
Truth taught therein is Eternal, but the very Words, the very order of these Words and
even of Letters constituting these Words are also Eternal. All these are neither created
nor destroyed. They eternally exist in the bosom of God, the Eternal Ultimate Principle. As
every morning reveals the Sun, so every dawn of creation reveals them. As the Sun was
already there simply hidden from the ,view of man, so they were already there simply
hidden from the view of men. As such, according to the Orthodox Belief, their Authority is
Absolute, i.e., by itself and not depending on any other external factor. As such to temper
with them is sacrilege.

17. As for the remaining three works, they do embody the Eternal Truth, but the words
embodying it are not eternal. Their authors did visualize the Eternal Truth as embodied in
the Eternal words, but for conveying it, they employed their own words. In doing so, they
amplified the meaning of the Vedas. The Vedas, are 'absolutely clear and categorical in
1 heir statement of the Eternal Truth. But through human weakness, certain persons are
unable to grasp it. In their minds doubts arise as to the exact nature of this Eternal Truth.
These latter works serve to dispel them. Thus their service is also very great.

18. Incidentally, from the rationalistic point of view, one point requires clarification; and
without this clarification, whatever has been stated above becomes almost meaningless.
Had there been only one Book of Revelation, e.g., the Vedas, in and for 'the whole world,
no trouble would have, at all or ever, arisen. All would have had tbe same belief and the
matter would have ended there. But, unfortunately for the peace of the world this is not
the case. Besides the Vedas, we have other Books of Revealatlon too, namely, tile Bible
and the Koran. For the Christians and the Mohammedans, the Bible and the Koran are
respectively as authoritative as the Vedas for the Hindus. Moreover, had their contents
been the same though their language differed, even then much trouble would not have
arisen. For, nowadays we do find these Books of Revelation translated into different
languages. But that also is not the case, Now, last but not the least has come the Positive
Science dealing a death-blow to a number of orthodox beliefs based on statements to be
found in these Books of Revelation. Take for .instance the Christian belief about the date
of creation of this world. According to the Bible, the world was created some four or five
centuries before Christ. The evolution- ary science has given a direct lie to this belief. To
cite another instance let us go to the Bhagavata, one of the four authoritative works for
the Hindus according to Sri Vallabhacarya. According to this Bhagavata, it is not the earth
that goes round the Sun but vice versa, i.e., it is the Sun that goes round the Earth. Now,
no sincere student of modern astronomy can accept this, however great an admirer of the
Bhagavata he may be in other respects. Such being the case, how are we to satisfy our
rational sense and at the same time stick to our Orthodox Belief? This is really a very
serious problem. And in the present age of strictly scientific mental attitude, we cannot
afford to evade this issue if we really want the educated public to be sincerely religious.
So let us face this problem fairly and squarely.

19. To do so, let us first amplify this issue. The conflict detailed above on close analysis
takes two distinct forms: one that of the various Books of Revelation with Positive
Sciences; and the other, that among the various Books of Revelation themselves.

20. Let us consider first that between the various Books of Revelation and Positive
Sciences. The spheres of the two are ordinarily distinct. And if they restrict, themselves to
their respective spheres, no conflict will arise. Body, bodily comforts, and the external
universe are the proper sphere of Positive Sciences. If they turn the gaze inward, they
introspect and analyse the mind. Beyond that they do not go. Nor do they care to go.
They confine themselves to this life on this earth. They generally never worry about the
life hereafter; nor do they worry about the life that might have proceded the present one.
Thus, in a way, their sphere is limited. Nevertheless, it must be said to. their credit that
their pursuit of knowledge is sincere and objective, their sacrifice very great, and their
consequent achievements really astounding. Individual conduct, individual and universal
peace, peace extending beyond the present life to future ones constitutes on the other
hand, the proper sphere of the religious Books of Revelation. The real religion consists,
not in what one believes but in how one lives. If the followers of religion strictly confine
themselves to this sphere of theirs,, there will arise no occasion to come into conflict with
Positive Sciences. On the contrary, they will have to learn a lot from the sincere conduct
of the pioneers of Positive Sciences. But the trouble, starts when the followers of religion
cross the boundary of their sphere attack the theories of Positive Sciences; and also
when the scientists leave their sphere and begin to give their opinions on matters of which
they know nothing, e.g., when they proudly proclaim that there is nothing like soul or the
next life. Religion with its promises of peace and happiness in the life after death will not
succeed in a conflict with Positive Science which has materially cotributed to the comforts
in this very life. The technological advance has,.

brought about a number of material comforts to a large majority. The advance in medical
science has reduced mortality, disease, and even physical pain. Famines there are; but
they have lost their virulence. Trainloads of foodstuff are immediately rushed to the
famine-stricken areas, Wars there are; but weaker nations receive immense help to fight
for preserving their freedom. Sometimes even a forced reconciliation puts a sudden stop
to a hotly waged war. There are travelling facilities. There are communication facilities.
Dailies, periodicals, and books keep people in constant contact with not only what is
happening in the various parts of the world, but also with what progress is made in
various fields from day to day. Cinema and television have enabled ,men to enjoy various
scenes without leaving their towns or houses. This being the case, can an ordinary man
have .patience enough to wait for the happiness in the life after .death leaving that .of the
present one, especially when there is no guarantee for it? Moreover, the majority of those
who preach or teach religion lead a life full of material comforts. How such religious
preachers or teachers can induce others to let go material comforts? So it is in the
interest of religion to confine itself to its proper sphere of conduct and not to quarrel with
science. On the other hand, in what way has Science really profited by neglecting or even
destroying Religion? Its evident goal is to make mankind more happy. But has it
succeeded in achieving its goal? It is the selfless and spotless character of scientists that
has made 'the present scientific progress possible. But has not Science hopelessly
neglected the character of mankind in general? And with what sad result? The potential
weapon for its com- plete annihilation. Better it is for all if Science and Religion join hands,
one supplementing the other.

21. Next let us turn to the conflict among the various Religions themselves. The goal of all
of them is invariably the peace here and hereafter .They all believe in life after death, i.e.
in

the life of Spirit. They are more after mental peace than aftel material comforts. The saints
of all Religions have amply demonstrated in their very lives that this mental peace is a
reality to be attained to in this very life. That Prophets appear from time to time to guide
people aright is a fact admitted by all religions. Follow any prophet sincerely and
wholeheartedly and the spiritual peace is yours in this very life. Hinduism respects all
Prophets alike. According to it Prophets are God incarnate on this earth. And the real
beauty of the limdu Scriptures lies in the tact that Gautama Buddha who openly
condemned them is also declared by them to be an incarnation of God. For he lived the
life of peace and taught it to others in the way that suited him and his. followers.
Moreover, Swami Vivekananda not at all hesitates, in declaring Christ too to be an
incarnation of God. Although, according to the Hindu Scriptures there is a hierarchy
among: the various incarnations, yet there is no insistence on some one and on no other.
An aspirant is free to worship any Incarnation, it like Siva and Sakti are not among the
twenty-four famous. Incarnations of God. Nevertheless they are widely worshipped
among the Hindus. The fundamental belief of the Hindu Scrip-, turee is that the Selfsame
Ultimate Principle receives various names. And this belief is as old as the Vedas. "The
Substance is One, though tha Sages have given different names to it.”15'. One highly
current stanza of the Hindu Religion states that salutation to any form whatsoever
reaches the Ultimate. Substance. 16 The Bhagavadgita also declares in the same strain,
that worshipper of any other deity is the worshipper also or God the Almighty. 11 The
worship of different deities may yield different fruits. But the fact that such a worship does
yield a fruit is never doubted. Moreover, Hinduism believes in, many lives for the same
Spirit. Mistakes of one life may be rectified in another. In this respect Christianity and
Islam differ materially from Hinduism. The Bible and the Koran do. state that Prophets
appear from time to time. But somehow or other the Christians and the Mohammedans
respectively came to.

believe that Christ and Mohammed were the only Prophets; and that liberation was
possible through them alone and through no other. Had the matter stood here and gone
no further, no trouble would have arisen at all. But .by way of a corollary the Christians
believed further that those who did not believe in Christ's divine personality went to hell
even through they believed in someone else's divine personality. Not only this. They went
a little further and believed that anyone who did not make a public profession that he
believed in Christ's personality or who professed to believe in someone else's divinity was
a menace to the spiritual welfare of the community and as such deserved either to be
exiled or executed. As for the Mohammedans, they came to believe that since
Mohammed had taught that God is formless anyone who worshipped God in any form
was an infidel and such deserved to be put to sword. Both or them could do as they liked
as long as they were backed by temporal power. But what are they now ? Their past
deeds have simply served to alienate the minds of men from religion with the inevitable
result that the many good points of religion are missed by them. Now there is little respect
for an individual. The gross material gain has become the sole guiding motive. Individuals
as well as nations give promises as long as such promises further their self-interest. As
soon as these promises have done that, they are openly" violated. In religion the ideal of
God is always before a person. This always reminds a person of his shortcoming. This in
turn leads of self-improvement of individuals first, and through them that of the society
next. Before materialism there is no such ideal. Moreover there is an implicit belief that
the fault lies with external conditions. And certain scientific researches have served to
strengthen this pelief. Destroy germs and you will be free from diseases; Supply vitamins
and deficiency-diseases will disappear. This belief does not stop here. It penetrates the
sphere of social conditions. Masses are unhappy not because there is something wrong
with them. But this is so simply because of a few vested interests. Destory them and the
masses will become

automatically happy. The worst outcome of this belief is that what one thinks is assumed
to be right and anything contrary to it is assumed to be wrong. This leads to the belief that
you are always right and your opponents are 'always wrong; and that as long as your
opponents live, there is no hope of peace. So, if they are physically weak, they have to be
destroyed openly; if they happen to be physically strong, they have to be destroyed
secretly. But opponents should not be allowed to remain alive. Every sort of opposition
has to be crushed outright. And there is an idle dream born of mental inertia that if this
sort of crushing opposition is carried on for some time, opposition will be completely
destroyed and there will be harmony everywhere. Religionists should remember that
though religions are destroyed, the spirit of persecution is not destroyed. So, they must
learn to tolerate other religions. There is some hope of universal peace then alone. The
best way is to concentrate on religious behaviour rather than on religious belief. Beliefs
are bound to be different as are our bodies. Do we tolerate other's bodies? Why not then
others' beliefs?

22. As has been suggested above, not only different Religions among themselves, but
Sciences also should stick to their proper sphere; and should not only tolerate one
another but cooperate also with one another. Can we not put different flowers in a
bouquet and enhance its beauty? To drive home the utility of Religion, let us further
consider it together with Science, its modern great rival. As has been said above, the
respective spheres of Religion and Science are quite distinct. But that cannot mean that
they should be at daggers drawn. Two men can fight and kill each other if they want to do
so. But does this mean that because they can do so, they also should do so Can they not
heJp each other and live peacefully together? Time makes worst enemies friends. Can
they not do 'voluntarily what they are willing to do under compulsion? Let it be asserted
point-blank that such considerations are a

contribution of Religion and not of Science. Neglect of Religion has resulted in the fact
that the most wonderful 'resources of Science are today in the hands of human beings
who can only be described as biped beasts. As long as Science, without heeding
Religion, will go on study- ing and exploring the external universe, it will not be able to
teach or convince men that they are brothers, and as such they ought to love and help
one another. The external nature 'is red in tooth and claw; and its study by itself will teach
men only to become red in tooth and claw. It is Religion which teaches us that we are the
sparks of the Self-same Fire. If a mosquito sits on the leg of a person, his hand
instinctively hurries there to drive it away. Why? Because they belong to the same person.
The same analogy will work in the case of human 'beings too, provided they have
assimilated the truth that they 'belong to the self-same Entity, that they are different
sparks 'of the Self-same Fire. That is why such mighty divine personalities as Buddha and
Christ taught us to love even our enemies. Their teaching proceeded from within and not
from without. It is Religion that teaches us to protect the weak instead of exploiting their
weakness and getting fatter at their expense. It is Religion which has universal peace and
pros- perity for its goal. Do we find anything of the sort in the teachings of material
Science? Science is neutral. It is after all a means. It can be utilized either for a good or a
bad end. But whether an end is good or bad will be taught by Religion.

23. It has been repeatedly stated above that the spherse Religion and Science are
distinct. So it is wrong to judge one from the standards of the other. Take an ordinary "
instance from our common experience. In our everyday commerce, i.e. in our day-to day
transactions we give and we take. The laws of giving are different from those of taking.
When we : purchase a thing, we follow the laws of taking. Before purchasing we first
examine it. We also look to the person who

sells it. If the thing is found to be defective, we refuse to purchase it. If it turns out that the
person concerned happens to be a thief, we refuse to have any more dealings with him.
Moreover, wilen both tile thing and the person concerned are found satisfactory, we try to
bring down the price. When the price is settled, .we only pay that much and no more.
These are laws generally applicable to all acts of purchasing. Suppose, for instance, that
we have to purchase a thing out of strict necessity. Then the above laws become wholly
in applicable. We have an adage "Necessity knows no law." When astrict necessity
arises, we do not look much to the quality of a thing. For instance when we purchase
food-stuff at a fair-price or a ration-shop, we receive willingly or unwillingly whatever is
supplied to us without locking to the quality or otherwise thereof. Moreover, when a thing
is urgently needed, we do not even higgle-haggle for the price of that thing. Now, let us
turn to the other act, namely, that of giving. There we try to pass on even a defective
thing. Then we do not look to the character of a person purchasing it. If he is a fool
prepared to pay the price demanded by us wjthout looking to the thing purchased, so far
so good. We want just such a customer. If from the act of selling we turn to that of feeding
liberally, new laws emerge. We serve the best dishes. We do not \ook to the character of
the persons fed. Let us now, in order to make the point still more clear, consider business-
relations and love-relations. In business- relations we always look to the persons and to
their respective merits. We pay more to persons who are more serviceable. "Get on or get
out." is the maxim of business-relations. But the case with love-relations is just the
opposite. Suppose, a mother has two sons. One earns a lot, the other is a young child.
Will the mother pay greater attention to the earning son, and less to the younger one?
From these instances it will be amply clear that laws applicable to one set of relations are
Got applicable to another such set. Thus to apply the standards.

of Science to Religion and then discredit it is absolutely wrong.

24. After this general consideration of the difference of standards in different spheres, let
us now come to the close consideration of those in the spheres of Science and Religion.
"No trusting without testing is a very healthy maxim of not only Science but or general
commerce too. But if we strictly stick to this maxim, our progress though definite will be
very slow and sometimes impossible. In a number of cases, trust and unconditional
surrender become indispensable conditions. When we sow a seed, we do not make a
stipulation with the soil. We surrender it to the soil unconditionally. If in ninety- Nine cases
the seed sprouts, in one case it rots too. Similarly, when we invest a sum in a business
enterprise, we do not make a stipulation with the enterprise. We invest our sum
unconditionally. In ninety-nine cases we make a profit, but in one case we may lose also.
And even in the field or scientific research, we never stipulate with our experiment first
and then proceed with it. Here out of ten, only one succeeds and nine fail. When we are
serious, our attitude at once changes. All idle talk ceases, and we willingly take a risk,
Here trust comes first. It is the very starting point. Science starts with doubt, Religion
starts with faith. Now what this faith is can be seen from the following lines from the pen of
no less a personality ttan Mahatma Gandhi himself:

"It is faith that steers us through stormy seas, faith that moves mountains, and faith that
jumps across the ocean. That faith is nothing but a living, wide awake consciousness of
God within. He who has achieved that faith wants nothing; Bodily diseased he is spiritually
healthy; physically poor, he rolls in spiritual riches.

"Without faith this world would come to naught in a moment. True faith is appropriation of
the reasoned experience or people whom we belive to have lived a life purified by prayer

and penance. Belief, therefore, in prophets or incarnations who have lived in remote ages
is not an idle superstition but a satisfaction of an inmost spiritual want.

"Faith is not a delicate flower which would wither under the slightest stormy weather. Faith
is like the Himalaya mountains which cannot possibly change. No storm can possibly
remove the Himalaya mountains from their foundation ...And I want everyone of you to
cultivate that faith in God and religion."18

Sri-Vallabhacarya, too, lays full stress on this Faith in God. He advises us not to lose this
Faith even for a moment. He says: Where everything fails, Faith succeeds. The doors of
this Faith are closed to none; they are open to all and at all times. 19 This Faith, however,
is not something to be toyed with. Flouting God in periods of prosperity and then praying
to him in hours of adversity and then forgetting him completely and thereafter returning to
the old ways will generally never succeed. The scientific spirit of doubt works in the
sphere of Religion too. Here the Faith itself is tested. Love of humanity or of all creation is
the fundamental constituent of Real Religion. The Ultimate Principle governing the
Universe, it is immaterial whether you call it God or Nature, tested Christ. And Christ
passed the test. And this is the invariable experience of all the lovers of God and the
world, the great saints of all Religions who have shed and have continued to shed the
light in order to dispel darkness which, somehow or other, envelops this world of mortals.
According to Hinduism Faith in an idol is just its beginning, It gradually goes on increasing
till it embraces the whole universe, which is its point of culmination. This may take a
number of lives. But fortunately at times such persons do incarnate on this earth in whose
life this culmination point is seen to have been reached in this very life as a result of
strenuous efforts in past lives. According to Hinduism, Buddha

was such a person. Reaching this point of culmination, such persons cease to be human
and become divine. They are no more men. They are God incarnate, God in flesh and
blood walking upon this earth and talking to us mortals.

25. To resume the thread let us return to the Orthodox Belief that the Vedas are Eternal
Words embodying Eternal' Truth. Unfortunately, all the truths embodied in these Scrip¬
tures are not borne out by later historical as well as scientific research. At times they are
given a direet lie. How are we to stick to the Orthodox Belief in such circumstances ?
Moreover; what justification can we find for such personalities as Sri-Vallabhacarya,
whom we are tempted to regard as almost omniscient, holding such Orthodox Belief as
finds little justification in the light of latest research? And it is this point which we shall now
consider. In the immediately preceding paragraph it has been stated that, according to
Hinduism, Religion starts with a faith in an idol. An idol is believed to be God. Objectively
such an idol is either a well-shaped, or ill-shaped or even shapeless piece of metal or
stone. But, subjectively it is God. And it is this subjective belief that is at the root of all
religious progress. Let it be a piece or metal or stone for others and even for our physical
eyes and even our physical mind. But in our heart of hearts it is God incarnate, it is God
who is manifest for us in this form, limitless God, manifest in a form having limitations, in
spite ot these limitations. With open-eyed-nevertheless blind faith an aspirant proceeds
further. The God of Belief gradually becomes the God of actual experience. And this is not
a piece of idle imagination. We had amidst us- just a century ago a historical personality
having such experience in the person of Swami Ramakrsna Paramahamsa. It is on this
line only that we can justify the Orthodox Belief held by such personal ities as Sri
Vallabhacarya. Whatever these Scriptures are objectively, subjectively they are Eternal
Words embodying Eternal Truth. And, just as an idol which to others remains an idol

but to a sincerely devout worshipper becomes God walking before and talking to him, in
the same way Eternal Truth manifests itself to such a sincere believer. This belief is part
.and parcel of spiritual discipline. In military discipline also we have :

"There's not to reason why;

There's but to do and die,"20

In this connection I am tempted to quote again the remarks of Mahatma Aurobindo Ghosh
who had had the direct vision of the Ultimate Reality in this very life. He writes ;

'It is not the human defects of the Guru that can stand in the way when thers is the
psychic opening, confidence and surrender.In my own case, I owe the first decisive turn of
my inner lite to one who was infinitely inferior to me in intellect, education, capacity, and
by no means spiritually perfect or supreme; but having seen a power behind him and
(having;) decided to turn there for help I gave myself entirely into his hands and followed
with an automatic passivity the guidance I give this example to show how these things
work; it is not in the calculated way the human reason wants to lay down, but by a more
mysterious and greater law.21 In all humility I say that this is my only way of justifying Sri-
Vallabhacarya's belief and bold remark that there is not a single letter in the .whole of the
Veda that is not true.22

26, Apart from all that has been stated above, it must be admitted, from the objective
point of view that there are many Scriptural statements and beliefs which are contrary to
the facts established unmistakeably by Science. To resolve this conflict a way has been
suggested, which is not altogether unreasonable. Scriptures have recorded beliefs current
at the time when they came to be composed. All these beliefs, especially those connected
with the objective universe, were based on the imperfect knowledge of the persons of the
age. To such

beliefs we need not attach any great importance. Moreover some statements might have
been poetic exaggeration. They too need not be attached any great importance. Certain
portions may be apocryphal. It is certainly very difficult to separate the genuine portions
from the dross. But that does not mean that because of some dross, the genuine portions
too should be thrown away. Suppose, a limb of a certain person is diseased. That does
not mean, however, that that person should be killed outright, As long as he is alive, he is
allowed to remain so. Something of the sort has to be done with regard to Scriptures. The
Orthodox Believers, including Srl-Vallabhacarya, are conscious of this fact. And with
regard to Bhagavata. he has even stated in unmistakeable terms that its inspired portions
(Samadhi-Bhasa) alone are fully authoritative. As for the remaining ones he states that
they are authoritative in so far as they conform to the inspired ones.23 But, ultimately, his
attitude is more that of a mystic than of a critic. More- over, the real beauty of Sri
Vallabhacarya lies in the fact that he is never a fanatic.

27. As stated above Sri-Vallabhacarya is never a fanatic, He is very liberal-minded. In his
Tattvydlpa-Nibandha he enjoins his followers to respect anywhere and everywhere what
conforms to the Vedic Teaching.24 Physically a strict adherent of the caste-system and a
sincere observer of all rules pertaining thereto, he was nevertheless mentally very liberal.
He respected more those who were on a higher spiritual plane. And in that case be did
not look to their lower social status. That is why some of the devotees of his and of his
son's come from very low castes and communities. He is, however & not in favour of
making a mess of everything on this account. He fully "espects all social institutions,
especially when these latter have scriptual sanction. But, at the same time he believes "
.and boldly teaches that social shortcomings are no barriers to spiritual progress and even
to spiritual success;5

28. After so much digression necssitated by the sceptical attitude of modern readers, we
may now safely turn to what type of attitude Sri- Vallabhacarya has towards his Scriptural
Authorities.

29. In his Anubhasya,26 he himself has described four such attitudes: (i) To attach
greatest importance to the direct import of the words neither adding to nor subtracting
from the meaning thus obtained, (ii) To attach equal importance to the words as well as to
their meaning, (iii) To attach greater importance to the meaning rather than to the words,
(iv ) To attach greatest importance to the meaning and not to the words. How these four
different attitudes arise will be clear from the following consideration. As stated above,
according to the Orthodox Belief, the Vedas are the Eternal Words embodying the Eternal
Truth. And as such, not every word but even every letter thereof is authoritative for a
strictly Orthodox Person. So the only attitude consistent with this belief is to show equal
respect to all the passages. But such a consistency lands us into a trouble. For, there are
certain passages of the Vedas the meaning whereof conflicts with that of certain other
passages. Take for instance the following two passages: (i) One, meaning that the
Ultimate Reality cannot be seen with the eyes.21 and (ii) the other, meaning that some
wise person did see this Ultimate Reality with his eyes.28 No man in his senses can
accept both these. How is it possible to see a thing that cannot be seen at all ? Even an
ordinary fellow knows it fully well. That a thing can be seen and cannot be seen at the
same time is logically impossible. If you want to show equal respect to both the adove
passages, then you will have to let go your logic. And if you want to stick to your logic, you
will have to let go your respect for one of the above two Vedic passages. And the trouble
is not to end even there. You will have to justify yourself why you respect one passage
and reject the other. And for that too you will be relying on your logic. So logic and human.

reason become supreme. Thus if logic and human reason can decide the nature of the
Ultimate Reality, what is the use of these Scriptures at all ? Why leave the liberty of logic,
a sure science, and make yourself dependent on the words of others ? But the trouble is
that our logic does not carry us far; and that is just the reason why we go to the Vedas
leaving logic behind. (This has been amply shown in the beginning of this Chapter.) You
will have then to make a choice between two clear-cut courses: Logic or the Vedic Word.
If logic, let go the Vedic word. If the Vedic word, let go your logic. Sn- Vallabhacarya is for
the Vedic word and not for logic, which is a product of the human mind having a lot of
limitations. His is the first attitude and cares little consistency. Others cannot reject logic
altogether. They literally accept one of the two passages that suits their temperament and
then in order to remain consistent with the meaning of that passage they try to explain the
meaning of the other passage metaphorically. Sri-Vallabhacarya cannot tolerate such
liberty with the Vedic Word, The Supreme Authority. But more of this will be discussed in
the next chapter in its proper place. But before doing so, I am tempted once more to
quote the following words Sri-Aurobindo Ghosh : "I give this example to show how these
things work; It Is not the caJculated way the human reason wants to lay down, but by a
more mysterious and greater law."20 Do these words not .amply justify Sri-
Vallabhacarya's attitude towards the Scriptures ?

CHAPTER III
ULTIMATE REALITY

1. In the System of Suddhadvaita Vedanta, otherwise known as Brahmavada, the One.
Secondless Ultimate Reality is the only category. Every other thing has proceeded from it
at the time of creation, is non-different from it during creation, and merges into it at the
time of dissolution. The two other well, known categories, namely, the animate souls and
the inanimate objects are respectively its parts and modifications. The animate souls are
its parts because they retain to some extent the essential qualities thereof, namely,
consciousness and joy. The inanimate objects are its modifications, because the above
said qualities are absent therein. The Dearest analogy is that of a gold ingot. Small
particles of gold can be had therefrom. Ornaments too can be made thereof. The Ultimate
Reality corresponds to the gold ingot; the animate souls to small particles; and the
inanimate objects exhibiting rich variety to various ornaments. Particles and ornaments
are in substance no less gold.

2. 'God. is nothing but a convenient theological term for this Ultimate Reality. In the Vedic
Scriptures it is called 'Brahma, because it is greater than its parts, the animate souls and
its modifications, the inanimate objects. It is also called 'Paramimtl' because it pervades
them all. These two aspects are more or Jess impersonal. In its personal aspect it is
known as 'Bhagavan', the word which is generally ah equivalent of 'God'. These different
words will be employed in different contexts. But their meaning will be one and the same,
namely, the Ultimate Reality.

3. For his metaphysical system which centres round this One. Secondless Ultimate
Reality. Sri-Vallabhacarya has wholly

relied on the Vedic Scriptures, especially, the Upanisads, which are generally known as
'Sruti'. And in what follows the words 'Vedic passage', .Upanisadic Passage', 'Sruti-
Passage' and 'Scriptural Passage', are employed in the same sense.

4. 'Suddhadvaita' means unity pure and simple. Now let us first see how Sri-
Vallabhacarya, wholly relying on Vedic Scriptures, arrives at such a doctrine and next
consider whether there is some rational justification for the same.

5. Turning to the Upanisads, which form a very vital part of Vedic Scriptures so far as their
metaphysical doctrine is considered, we find the Passage,

"Sad eva Somya idam agree asid, ekam eva advitlyam" meaning "In the beginning there
was only one Real Entity, only one and that too without a second". Thereafter comes
another Passage.'

"Tad aiksata 'Bahu syam, prajayeya' iti"2 meaning "That one Real Entity wished: Let me
become many, let me multiply myself". And later on it is stated that it did become many
and did multiply itself. Relying on these two and similar other passages, Sri-Vallabhacarya
has arrived at his doctrine of Suddhadvaita Brahmavada. Now let us see what this "Sat",
the Ultimate Reality, is Some Western Philospher has remarked to the effect that man first
looks out, next looks in, and then looks up.3 And it is in this way that we become aware of
the world without, of the soul within, and of God beyond. Physical sciences study the
world without; psychical sciences study the soul within; and theological systems study
God beyond. The discussion in detail of the natures of the world without and of the soul
within has little relevance in this thesis. So, it is only in their relation with the Ultimate
Reality that their natures will be discussed later on. So for the present let us confine
ourselves to the discussion of the nature of God, the Ultimate Substance, from which,
according to the Vedantic

doctrine, both the world without and the soul within are derived.

6. From the strictly rationalistic point of view, the enlightened human mind is the only
source from which all concepts arise. So, it is to this source that we have to turn for our
concept of God. Mahatma Gandhi, as all know, was certainly endowed with an enlightend
mind. Now, let us see what he has to say about God. He writes.

"There is an indefinable mysterious power that pervades everything. I feel it though I do
not see it. It is this unseen power which makes itself felt and yet defis all proof because is
so unlike all that I perceive through my senses It transcends the senses.

"But it is possible to reason out the existence of God to a limited extent. Even as an
ordinary affair we know that people do not know who rules or why and how he rules. And
yet they know that there is a power that certainly rules. ..I do feel... that there is
orderliness in the universe, there is an unalterable law governing everything and every
being that exists or lives. It is not a blind law; for no blind law can govern the conduct of
living beings. That law then which governs all life is God. Law and lawgiver are one. I may
not deny that Law and Lawgiver, because I know so little about it or him. Even as my
denial or ignorance of the existence of an earthly power will avail me nothing, so will not
my denial of God and his Law liberate me from its operation; whereas humble and mute
acceptance of divine authority makes life's journey easier as the acceptance of earthly
rule makes life under it easier.

"I do dimly perceive that as everything around me is ever changing, ever dying, there is
underlying all that change a living power that is changeless, that holds all together, that
creates, dissolves, and recreates. The informing power or spirit is God. ...

" And is this power benevolen- or malevolent? I see it purely benevolent. For I can see
that in the midst of death life persists, in the midst of untruth truth persists, in the midst of
darkness light persists. Hence I gather that God is Life, Truth, Light. He is Love. He is
supreme Good...l con- fess that 1 have no argument to convince through reason. Faith
transcends reason."4

From these gems from the pen of Mahatma Gandhi, a veritable prophet of the present
age, it will appear that God is more of a powerful principle to be felt in one's own life rather
than to be known through senses or to be demonstrated to others dialectically or
experimentally. It is just like one's health. It is something to be felt and not known through
eyes or ears. Ordinarily, what is vital is generally Celt, anq what is non-vital is generally
known. A doctor only knows the pain, but the patient actually feels it. Moreover, this God
is a powerful principle that controls the universe, a powerful principle that keeps
everything in order, a powerful principle that silently and incessantly works regardless of
the fact whether we are conscious or unconscious of its existence. In other words, God is
like the law of gravitation that goes on working incessantly though silently regardless of
the fact whether people know it or not. Moreover, God resembles force. We do not know
what force is. We know, however, what force does. In this respect God and our own soul
are alike. We do not know what a human or an animal soul is. But we certainly know what
it does. The body that is animated, functions. The one which is dead, does not. Physically
and chemically a living body and a dead body do not much differ. Then this functioning of
the body is du~ to the presence of the soul in it. This soul may have individuality, and
consciousness as is the case with either the human or the animal soul. Or it may have no
individuality and no consciousness as is the case with the state of perfect fitting of the
various parts of a machine. Nevertheless, this state of perfect fitting of the various parts
.of a machine is the soul of. that machine. If it is there, the

machine works; if not, it does not. If we want to know the omnipresent nature of God, it
will be absolutely necessary for us to extend our notion of the soul. In today's thought, our
notiOn of the soul is very limited. It is limited only to the principle animating a human or an
animal body. In Indian philosophical thought, the word 'Atma' has this extended sense. It
is derived as

"Atati vyapnoti iti Atma".

meaning 'Atml is that which pervades and thus anumatest. Returning to the point, let us
note that Mah-atma Gandht has, moreover, found this God. .to be good.

7. But here a very pertinent question can arise in our mind. Is this principle intelligent ?
i.e., Does it work with discrimination ? Or, does it work blindly and inexorably like the law
of gravitation? An answer to this will be found in the following words of Dr.
Radhakrishnan, another enlightened Indian mind :

"Philosophy has its roots in man's practical needs. If a system of thought cannot justify
fundamental human instincts and interpret the deeper spirit of religion, it cannot meet with
general acceptance. The speculations of philosophers, which do not comfort us in our
stress and suffering, are more intel- lectual diversion and not serious thinking. The
absolute of Samkara, rigid, motionless, and totally lacking in initiative or influence, cannot
call forth our worship. ...The obvious taet of experience that, when weak and erring
human beings call from the depths, the helping hand of grace is stretched out from the
unknown, is ignored. Samkara does not deal justly with the living sense of companionship
which the devotees have in their different lives."5 Before commenting upon these lines, I
am tempted to quote, the following lines from Stiradasa :

"Suneri maine nirbalake bala Rama
Pichali sakha bharum santanakl,

Ade sambhare kama."6

meaning that the poet has heard that God helps the helpless; and that he can cite a
number of instances from the lives of devotees that God had always stood by their side in
the hour of their need and has as a rule ferried them across, out of troubles, safely to the
other shore.

Coming to the point, from the above words of Dr. Radha krishnan, we learn that this
governing principle, conveniently termed God, is not only powerful, but is also kind. He is
ever ready to help a person in distress. Call him forth from the depth of your heart; and he
is there eagerly wating to come to your help. Moreover, he is always by your side. He
never leaves you even for a moment. It is something like the clearness of water. It is
always there. Remove the dirt and it is there. You have not to import it from outside.

8. Not only saints like Mahatma Gandhi, but scientists like Sri C. V. Raman have also
amply experienced this kind and constant companionship of this Ultimate Principle. This
latter when visiting Ahmedabad had said in one of his lectures that during various
scientific experiments he was just like a person groping in darkness; nevertheless it was
his constant experience that he hit upon the right course either in his first, second, or third
attempt. And it is because of the complete conviction of the kind and constant
companionship of the good God guiding our intellect that the Vedic Seer, Visvamitra, in
his famous Gayatrl Mantra, which is daily repeated by devout Brahmins, prays to the
Ultimate Principle that it may lead him aright; and Sri-Vallabhacarya prays as follows :

"Buddhi-preraka-Krsnasya pada-padmam prasldatu"8

meaning "May the lotus-foot of Lord Krsna, vlho guides our intellect, do us favour".

Coming to the point, we are compelled to state that to ignore the solid experiences of
such devotes of Truth as Mahatma Gandhi and Sri C. V. R aman and to say that God

js merely an idea arising in a weak mind suffering from fear- complex is mere
meaningless persistence in one's own ignorance, more to be pitied than condemned.

9. Now let us see if any other consideration leads us in this direction. The Bible says:
Kingdom of God is amongst you."g The Katha Upani~ad in the same strain says :

"Kascid dhlrab pratyag-atmanam aiksad
Avrtta-caksur amrtatvam icchan.10

meaning "Some rare seeker of like eternal turned his gaze inward and saw God face to
face." God is both within and without. The difference is, however, that God without is
simply known whereas God .within is actually felt. The hunger of another person is simply
known; but one's own hunger is keenly felt. And knowing and feeling are Worlds apart.
Other thinkers simply knew that the world is full of misery, whereas Gautuma Buddha
actually felt it. Other Indians knew that India was in bondage, whereas Mahatma Gandhi
actually felt it. In the same way, philosophers simply know that God is everywhere,
whereas saints actually feel his presence everywhere. That is why the hearts of the latter
are fully of compassion for even the tiniest of creatures.

10. Moreover, even where God without is known, it is so always with the help of the
mental apparatus that lies within. So let us direct our gaze inward. Doing so, we find that
our enlightened mind is full of certain notions. And one very important notion among these
is that of infinity. Almost all the objects of our experience are finite, i.e., limited in time,
space, and substance. And the finite nature of these objects leaves us dissatisfied. We
hanker after more and more. Take for instance, our knowledge. This knowledge is a very
vital part of our nature. It is this knowledge, this ever-expanding know- ledge that has
made man the master of things. The progress

of civilization is no less due to this ever-expanding knowledge. The amount of knowledge
that has gradually accumulated during the recent decades is simply tremendous.
Nevertheless it is limited, and it has left humanity dissatisfied, which as such hankers after
more and more of it. Now, a very pertinent and a searching question can be asked: how
are we to explain this notion of infinity and the consequent sense of dissatisfaction?
Moreover , there is a definite progress; and besides this there is also now an undisputed
fact of evolution. But we can ask here also: Granted that there is a progress or an
evolution; but in what direction Certainly not in the direction of that which is not. Such a
belief is simply shocking. As much shocking as the belief that something comes out of
nothing. As for this .latter belief, it is referred to and refuted by a direct appeal to the heart
even in the Upanisads.

"Tad ha eke ahuh :

Asad eva idam agre asit. ...Tasmad asatah
sad jayata. Kutah tu khalu Somya evam syat. ...

Katham asath sad jayeta."11

It is here said: "Some say that what we perceive today was absolutely nonexistent in the
past. But, my dear, how can it be possible? How can something come out of nothing?"
We neither believe in absolute past nor in absolute future, as the continuous cycle of
Satyuga, Tretayuga, Dwaparyuga and Kaliyuga. They believed that such a golden age did
exist in the past; and we believe that our future golden age is not merely a wishful
thinking. The historical current of the past as well as the present centuries definitely points
in that direction. We may ot may not believe in a Personal God ruling over the univese like
a king either despotic, just, or benevolent. But no sane man can deny this ideal state of
bliss which" either was in the past or will be in the future. And if we equate this ideal state
with God, there remains no difficulty whatsoever in believing in the existence of God.
Mahatma Gandhi, a staunch believer in God, could convince others only when he made
Truth his

God. Theists or no-theists, saints or scientists - all without an exception are votaries of
Truth. And there is no harm whatsoever in inverting our position. Instead of making
questionable God our ideal, let us make our definite ideal our God. The word 'Paramatma'
for God in Indian Theology has this inversion at its root. God is an ideal state of Atma, the
soul.

11. Though the method adopted by Indian Philosophers and Religionists appear to be
dogmatic, their great authority, the Vedas, especially the Upanisadic portions, appear not
to have adopted the same. The questioning spirit which permeates thenl is simply
admirable. Take for instance, the opening portion of the Svetasvataropanisad :

" Aum ! Brahmavadino vadanti :

Kim karanam Brahma? Kutah sma jatah?

Jivama kena? Kva ca sampratisthah?

Adhisthitha kena sukhetare
Vartamahe Brahmavido vyavastham?"12

meaning "Philosophers ask such questions as: What is the- Ultimate Cause? Who is
responsible for our creation? What sustains us? What supports us? What drives us in the
direction which we are least willing to take?" Is there anything dogmatic about this? To
take another instance let us turn to the Svetaketupakhyana of the Chandogyopanisad.
Here Svetaketu returns conceited from his preceptor after completing his studies. His
father in order to humble his pride asks him :

"Svetaketo, yan nu, Somya, idam mahamana anucanamanl
stabdhah asi, uta tarn adesam apraksyah yena asrutam
srutam bhavati, amatam matam, avijnatam vijnatam iti"13

meaning "My dear Svetaketu, you think yourself great, you think you have studied
everything, you feel proud; but have you

learnt from your preceptor, that which enables you to know even that which you have not
learnt, to know that which you have otherwise not known, and to visualize that which you
do not face?" There is nothing absurd about such a sweeping question. Look to money in
our ordinary commerce. Does it not enable us to procure so many things though by itself it
is one. Take another instance. Does a microscope though one not enable us to see so
many minute things not otherwise seen? Is this attitude dogmatic? As to the fundamentals
even the scientists and logicians have to believe in them, Even a doubter cannot doubt
everything. He has to believe in himself and in his doubting method.

12. The last-quoted instance is relevant to the point under consideration. We go on
adding and adding to our knowledge, and still we want to know more and more. Will this
hunger ever be satisfied ? The Upamsads say 'yes' They say:

"Bhidyate hrdaya-granthih,

Chidyante sarva-samsayah
krsyante casya karmani
Tasmin drste paravare."14

meaning "The knot tying the mind snaps asunder, all the doubts are set at rest, there
remains nothing to be done when once the Highest Reality is caught hold of." The true
grasp of the Highest principle brings about com.plete, satiation. The Bhagavadglta also
says :

"Yam labdhva caparam labham
Manyate nadhikam tatab;

Yasmin sthito na dubkhena
Gurunapi vicalyate."15

meaning "Once you have had this greatest gain, you feel that nothing more is required.
Nay more! Let all calamities be set you all at the same time. But you remain perfectly
unruffled." -

13. After referring to knowledge in its infinite aspect, let us now turn to power. Although it
is being popularly said that 'Knowledge is power,' yet they are essentially different, and
this general statement is merely metaphorical. And the difference between them can
clearly be grasped from the- popular parable of the blind and the lame persons. The lame
person bad only the knowledge of the road, whereas the blind person had only tbe power
to move on the road. Coming to the point practically all of us do possess some power,
however limited in extent it may be. But, as in the case of the knowledge so in the case of
this power too, we want to have more and more of it.

14. Now let us combine these two vital aspects of humanity, knowledge and power, and
also combine them with the notion of infinity which alone can explain our hankering after
more and more of them; and still further combine them with the already discussed
principle of "Something can never come out of nothing," an entity having infinite
knowledge and infinite power can very easily be postulated though not proved. And we
can conveniently term such an entity 'God' And this very well conforms with the general
notion of God as omniscient and omnipotent, i.e. all-knowing and all-powerful. And let us
not forget that in an intelligent being these two factors will always remain together. For we
know from our own experience that most of our powerlessness arises from our ignorance.
& We may have power but for want of knowledge it becomes of no use. And it is just this
that has given rise to the adage "knowledge is power." Moreover, the present human
mastery over physical forces is due solely to the vast amount of knowledge acquired
during recent decades.

15 Now, besides these two, namely, knowledge and power, there is a third very important
element in life; and this is goodness. Kindness and loveliness are mere variations of
good- ness. So they need not be considered separately. By themselves knowledge and
power are neutral. They can be used for good .

as well as bad ends. The gods possess knowledge and power to a considerable extent.
Demons also do the same. But, whereas, the former use them for good ends, the latter do
so for bad ones. This is the only difference between gods and demons. As for this
goodness, we do have it in life, but to a limited extent. To remain healthy is good; but we
are not ideally healthy. To be wealthy is good, but we do not have wealth to the extent we
would like to have it. We Can combine the notion of goodness with that of infinity. And we
have the notion of infinite goodness, not finding which we remain ever dissatisfied. Now.
this infinite goodness also is closely related to infinite knowledge and infinite power. For,
ignorance and weakness are generally not good.

16. Now, the close association of these three infinite elements will necessarily bring a
fourth element, namely, that of omnipresence, i.e. presence at all place and at all times.
To understand the necessity of this omnipresence, let us take a concrete example. A has
a son B, who has gone to England for study. After studying for a few years, this latter is
due for a very important examination. In what way can his father A who lives in India be of
actual help to him in his examination ? If this A has living faith in an omniscient ,
omnipotent, and omnigood God, he can at best pray to this latter. But if this latter, i.e.,
God to whom A has prayed to help his son B in the examination, in England is not present
there at the time of the examination, how can he help B ? So without being omnipresent,
God who is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnigood will be able to do nothing; and so
without omnipresence these three previ- ous qualities will cease to be what they are. So,
if there: is God, be must be omniscient, omnipoent. omnigood, and omnipresent. With our
limited intellectual faculties it is impossible to visualize, i.e. to comprehend such Almighty
God. And hence the necessity of Faith,

17. Science, which proceeds with doubt, which is proud of its own achievement, which
wants to give shape to things unknown in the light of the limited knowledge it possesses,
and which roughly brushes aside as imaginary whatever it cannot satisfactorily explain,
and which nevertheless does not admit its own inability, can never lead us far, It is the
Faith, the instinctive faith of a highly noble, a highly humble, and a highly imaginative
mind, that alone will enable man to grasp the farthest and the deepest mysteries of the
universe, "No trusting without testing" is a very valuable maxim; but to deny the existence
of a thing altogether simply because one has no knowledge thereof is disasterous to the
progress of science. Sir J. C. Bose successfully demonstrated that life permeates even
so-called lifeless substances, But this idea he had inherited from the sages of the past
who had arrived at it iDstinctiveJy, It is the haughtiness of physical sciences, which are
dazzled with the excessive light of their positive material achievements, that has arrested
their progress from proceeding to and exploring innumerable other spheres, In this
.connection the foJIowing verse is very instructive :

"It is not wisdom to be only wise,

And on the inward vision close the eyes,

But it is wisdom to believe the heart:

Columbus found the world and had no chart,"16

And even in the sphere of physical sciences, the greatest dnventions bad their roots in
human imagination, Television, tbe greatest of modern invention, took its shape first in the
.imagination of its inventor, Dr. Baird, In denying spirit and its infinite potential capacities,
physical sciences are suffering from the vice of "little learning" spoken of in the following
lines :

"Little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep or taste not pierian spring :
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again,"17

After this much consideration, it will be amply clear that the .belief in some Ideal Ultimate
Principle, conveniently called God, is not altogether without rational foundation

18. Now, we may safely turn to the Vedas and to the philosophic system of Srl-
Vallabhaclrya, which is founded on them, for what they have to say in connection with so
rich an entity as God.

19. The Vedas declare :

"Sad eva Somya idam agre asid, ekam eva
advitiyam."IB

which means: "There was, in the beginning, only one real substance, and that too, without
a second." Later On it is stated that the universe with all its rich variety proceeded from it
and after some time (it is immaterial how vast it is this universe till return to it and will
become one with it. The language employed here is metaphysical. Paraphrased into the
theological ,one, it comes to this: God, one and without a second, created this universe
out of himself and will after some time take it back into himself. But here our chief concern
is with one point only namely: God is one and that too without a second. And .it is this
point which is going to be taken up for detailed .consideration here.

20. The statement to be considered here is: "God is one; and that too without a second."
This statement is capable of being interpreted in two ways; and these two ways arise from
the two ways in which the word "second" is Interpreted. If 'by the word "second" is meant
a second God, the statement means that there is only one God and there is no other God.
In other words, there are no two Gods; but there can be entities other than God. The
dualistic philosophers like Sri- Madhvl. -clrya adopt this interpretation. If, however, by the
word "seeond" is meant a second entity, the statement means that God is the only
Ultimate substance in the universe. In other

words, there is no entity other than God, God is the only entity in the universe. This is the
interpretation adopted by monistic philosopher like Sri-Vallabhacarya. There is one
extreme view as regards the second interpretation. And this extreme view arises from the
logical limitation, namely, one is always one and is never two. Sri-Samkaracarya takes
this extreme view. According to him, everything other than this one Ultimate Substance,
which may happen to appear, is only apparent and not real. Take for instance a rope lying
in semi-darkness. A rope is a rope. It cannot become a serpent. One thing canot become
another. The serpent that appears instead of the rope is only apparent and not real, Sri-
Vallabhacarya does not go to this extreme. According to him the other substance is a
modification of the first. An illustration will serve to make the point clear. Suppose for
argument's sake that water is the ultimate substance. Now ice which is a modification of
water appears as ice and not as water i.e. it appears as something other than water. So
according to Sri-Samkaracarya, it is apparent and not real. In other words, it does not
exist at all. But, according to Sri-Vallabhacarya, it is a modification of water, it is water
itself .in another form, and it is as real as water.

21. Though not very relevant, the first interpretation may be discussed in detail as it has
got some philosophical importance. According to this interpretation, there can be onlyone
God and not two. Why so can be shown as below:

Above, we have shown that God fulfils a philosophical necessity. To explain satisfactorily
our notions of infinite, power, infinite knowledge, and infinite goodness, we have to.
postulate some such entity endowed with these qualities; and we have for convenience
sake termed this entity "God'. For our present purpose, the consideration of the first of
these three qualities is quite sufficient, and this quality is infinite. Now suppose there are
two Gods, quite distinct each other. For convenience sake let

us call them A and B. Now they are distinct, so their powers also are distinct. Take for
instance two flowers. Both of them have fragrance, but the fragrance of one is quite
distinct from that of the other. They are similar but not the same. In the same way. the
power of A is not power of B and the power of B is not the power of A. Now, if A lacks the
power of B. his power becomes finite; and the same is the case with B. for by infinate we
mean all-comprehensive. Next, if there are two Gods distinct from and independent of
each other, they are at some time bound to have different wishes; and to gratify them,
both being powerful, they are bound to quarre; and this quarrel would either be eternal or
would end with the triumph of one and the defeat of the other. In the first case, there
would remain no hope for eternal peace which all of us hanker after; and in the second
case the triumphant God remains the only God. We, who hanker after eternal peace,
would prefer the second alternative to the first, and admit that there cannot be two Gods,
each having infinite power.

22. Now, leaving aside the extreme view of the second inter- pretation, according to which
anything appearing different from the Ultimate Reality is altogether non-existent, as it is
not very relevant to our purpose, we may consider at some length that view which Sri-
Vallabhacarya has adopted. According to this, view, God is the only real substance; and
other substances are only modifications of God. and as such are as real as God. Ice and
steam do exist. They have not the appear- ance of water; they appear somewhat different
from the water, Nevetheless they in substance are not no-water. They are only the
different forms of self-same water. They are water but only in a different form. When an
ingot of gold is given the shape of an ornament, it does not cease to be gold. There is the
change of form only and not of substance. From these instances, we may turn to God, the
Ultimate Substance. Besides God about whom we ordinarily know only through the Vedas
or similar other works of revealation, we find two

other substances unmistakably presented to our healthy senses. They are animate souls
and inanimate substances. According to this second interpretation, these animate souls
and inanimate are but the modification of that self-same one God. In other words, they are
that one God in different forms, as is the case with ice and steam which are the self-same
water in different forms. Why so ? There is some capacity inherent in water which enables
it to become ice and steam. We have to admit it because we see it. The same is true of
this one God of Scriptures, who possesses an infinite number of powers. One of these
inherent infinite powers enables God to assume any form he likes. In this connection Sri-
Vallabhacarya's dictum,

"Sarvabhava-samarthatvad
Acintyaisavaryavad Brhat." 19

Meaning "The Ultimate Entity can assume all forms whatsoever . As such its powers are
simply incomprehensible," very well expresses this idea.

23. Relying on the Vedas, Sri-Vallabhacarya believes that in the beginning i.e. before this
Creation came into existence, the Ultimate Reality was the only entity; and it was this one
Ultimate Reality which became many. And it is this act of becoming many that is
responsible for the coming into existence of this Creation. Now this fact of creation also
when closely considered lends rational support to the doctrine of Suddhadvaita or Pure
Monism.

24. Now, look at this creation! It is not so simple an object as a pot made by a potter. And
even to make a pot is not an easy thing. To make such a pot also requires a lot of skill,
time, and trouble, and a fairly long process a$ well. Now, looking to the universe, we find
in it, first of all, the most wonderful design, the most wonderful order, the most wonderful
self- operating processes, the most wonderful self-enforcing laws, still more wonderful
psychological entites like intellect, intuition, will, emotion, and so on and so forth. Looking
to all

this, do we not feel that this universe is simply wonder incarnate? Next,think of the entity,
whether personal or impersonal, that has brought about all this! Sri-Samkaracarya in his
Sariraka Bhasya on the Biahma-sutras, in. this connection, writes to the effect that,
looking to the universe, one finds in it an infinite variety of names and forms, an infinite
variety of persons who incessantly go on doing something or another . an equally infinite
variety of persons voluntarily engaged in pursuit and enjoyment of pleasures or
involuntarily suffering a lot of pain, and over and above all these, strict laws governing
time, space, and the various events taking place therein; and then adds that it is
impossible to conceive mentally even how all this comes to pass, with the further remark
that one that is responsible for all this must certainly be omniscient and omnipotent.20 Sri
Vallabhacarya also in the same context writes to the effect that, to create without the least
effort this universe wherein we find a number of elements, organisms, gods, men, beasts,
and innumerable wonderfully designed worlds, to sustain it, and again to dissolve it, is-
certainly not ordinary.21

25. Now, there arises a very important question: A potter makes a pot, out of clay. A
goldsmith makes ornaments out of gold. Out of what, then, does the Creator create this
univ'erse ? Without clay the potter is helpless. For, without it he cannot make a pot.
Similarly, the goldsmith cannot make ornaments without gold. Moreover, the potter
requires a wheel; and the goldsmith his tools. Without these also they can do 'nothing.
Does the Creator too then requires any tools with which to fashion the universe? The clay
and the wheel are other than the potter; the gold and the tools are other than Ihe
goldsmith. Now, if the Creator were to need a material like clay or gold; or were to depend
on instruments like the potter's wheel or the goldsmith's tools, would it not curtail his
independence to that excent? How would this be compatible 'with his infinite power or
omnipotence? Srl-Madhvlclrya

very forcefully brings out this aspect of the Almighty in the: following stanza;

"Paratantro hyapekseta;

Svatantrah;1 kim apeksate ?

Sadhananam Sadhanatvam
Yatah kim tasya Sadhanaih ?,'22

where it is stated: One who is not independent may have to depend on other factors. But
would one who is absolutely independent have to depend on them ? On the contrary,
these very factors have to depend on God. Would such a God have, to depend on such
factors which by themselves without this God can do nothing ? The following parable from
the Keno. panisad is highly instructive in this connection :

Once upon a time, gods won a very great victory. This victory was won simply through the
Grace of God who always works and helps imperceptibly. The gods, however, thought
that it was won through their own valour; and on account of it began to hold their heads
high. God, the Almighty, out, of infinite grace, wanted to bring them back to their senses.
Accordingly, he assumed a mysterious form and appeared before them. The gods in
order to know what this mysterious being was first sent Agni, the god of fire. When Agni
approached God, God asked him, "Who are you and what type of power do you possess
?" Agni am I; and I can reduce to ashes whatever comes in my way, even if it be the
whole of this Earth" said he. Then God held forth a bit of straw and asked Agni to burn it.
Agni exerted his utmost, but was unable to burn it. He felt dejected and returned to the
gods disappointed. Next came the turn of Vayu, the god of wind, and Indra, the god of
rain. But they too shared the same fate. Thereafter God disappeared; and there appeared
a women of exquisite beauty, who taught the gods that the mysterious being was no other
than God the Almighty, through whose grace alone they had won their victory. In this way
they

learnt what the true ,5tate of things is.23 Would such an Almighty God require the help of
other factors?

26. Srl-Vallabhacarya in his Anu Bhasya on the Samanvaya- Sutra of the Brahma-
Sutras2. has discussed this point. And there he says: When it has been shown that
Brahman, i. e., God or the Ultimate Reality, has created the universe, the following
questions necessarily arise: Is this Brahman the material cause only, or the instrumental
cause only, or merely an agent depending on these two causes ? If it were all in one,
there would be no difficulty whatsoever. But, if it were only one of them, that would render
it helpless in the absence of anyone of the other two factors. It would be in a line with clay
which by itself cannot take the shape of a pot, or with the potter's wheel which by itself is
quite useless, or like the potter who can do nothing without the other two. To escape from
such an undesirable contigency, we are compelled to believe that God, the Creator, is all
in one; and that He, creates the universe out of himself without any extraneous help what¬
soever. And the Srutl passage,

"Sa a:tma:nam svayam akuruta',25

states this very thing. In this way also the fact of creation by God the omnipotent lends
rational support to the doctrine of Suddhadvaita or Pure Monism. Incidentally, the
difference between the Kevaladvita or Absolute Monism of Sri-Samkaracarya and the
Suddhadvlta or Pure Monism of Sri-Vallabhacarya, may with advantage be pointed out
here. According to the latter, the world being a modification of the Ultimate Realiy is as
real as the Ultimate Reality. A gold ornament is not less gold and less real than an ingot
of gold. According to the former, however, the Ultimate Reality is incapable of any
modification, so the world is merely an appearance and not a reality.

27. Now one more consideration also favours Suddhadvaita. And this is the considertion
of the state of 'Abhaya' or fear- lessness. Fearlessness is the first requiste of spiritual life,
the essential constituent whereof is perfect peace, the peace which nothing can disturb,
Late American President Roosevelt, it is reported, used to say that the only thing one
need fear is fear itself. Bhagavadgita, while enumerating spiritual virtues, places this
'Abhaya' at the head of the list.26 The goal of all spirtual pursuits, according to the
Upanisads is 'Abhaya.' Take for instance the following passages :

"Abhayam vai Janaka praptosi iti hovaca yajnavalkyah 27 meaning "Oh Janaka, you have
reached the state of perfect fearlessness' so said Yajnavalkya."

"Sa va esa mahin ajah Atma ajarah, amrtah,
abhayah Brahma. Abhayam vai Brahma."28

meaning "When this very soul, which is potentially great and' unborn ( i. e., eternally
existing) rises above old age and death, it itself is God who is absolutely free from fear.
This very fearlessness is itself Godhead."

28. Now, in this connection, we find in the Upanisads, a very sigificant passage :

"Sah abibhet. Tasmat ekaki bibheti. Sah ayam
Iksamcakre: Yan mad anyat nasti, kesmin nu
bibhemi iti. TataQ eva asya bhayam vlyaya.

Kasmat hi abhesyat. Dvitryad vai bhayam bhavati."29

meaning "That God ( whene alone i.e. before he created this universe) felt afraid. That is
why a person when alone feels afraid. But ( the very next moment) it occured to Him:
'Why should I feel afraid since there is nobody here except myself ?' This thought instantly
drove away His fear. Why should He

have felt afraid ? The feeling of fear is caused by the presence of another." This analysis
of the nature of fear is really wonderful. This shows how keen the psychological insight of
the Upanisadic Seers was. If we closely study this passage, two points clearly emerge:
not only do we feel afraid, but we want at the same time to become free from that fear.
This feeling of fear can be compared to the state of our ignorance. This state of ignorance
is not a state of bliss for us. We have an inborn desire to get out of it. Our curiosity is a
mild form of this desire. At the root of all scientific and philosophic progress, it is this
desire in an intense form. If, however, in spite of our desire to get out of this state of
ignorance, we acquiesce into it, it is simply because we are unable to get out of it. In this
matter we are like a person caught in a morass. It is not that he stays there because he is
happy there. It is simply because of his helplessness that he continues to remain there.
The same is the case with us. Our inborn curiosity, our strenuous efforts to acquire more
and more of knowledge, and our subconscious dissatisfaction with' the state of ignorance
in which we happen to be-all these point to the fact that the ideal state of our soul is that
where there is all light and no darkness. Coming to the feeling of fear, we can say the
same thing. That we feel afraid is a definite fact of our nature. There are a number of
fears lurking in our heart. We are, however, fortunate that they generally do not come up
to the level of consciousness. Otherwise our life would have been unbearably miserable.
And it is just in this connection tbat it bas been said "Where ignorance is bliss, it is folly to
be wise." In spite all tbis tbe fact that we want to get out of this feeling of fear and
subconsciously we desire to have that state of absolute fearlessness is equally true. But
this ideal state of absolute fearlessness is possible only if tbe Ultimate Reality is one
without a second. Thus Suddhadvaita. the state of one without a second becomes a
philosophical necessity when we consider it from the viewpoint of fear complex.

29. The consideration of the problem of evil of also leads us in this direction. Barring
Illusionists who believe everything to be unreal except the underlying substratum without
which the very illusion becomes impossible, all Vedantic philosophers believe that the evil
does exist, believing at the same time that God or the Ultimate Reality is fully free from all
evil, nirdosa. As long as this free-from-all-evil God is kept aloof from the universe no
trouble can arise. The God of Jainism is just like this. He is not at all-responsible for
anything good or bad in the universe. The inexorable Law of Karma, in this eternal uni¬
verse, with innumerable individual, ignorant, eternally existing souls, will explain
everything either good or bad in this universe. God is nothing but one or other, of these
souls, that has freed himself from all evil. Not God but past acts of individual souls are
responsible for anything good or bad in their lives. But, for the Theists who believe God to
be the whole and sole in this universe and according to whom not even a blade of grass
can move without His will, it is not so easy to absolve Him from all evil. Had there been no
evil in this universe, had this universe been as free from all evil as God, no trouble would
have arisen at all. But unfortunately, this is, however, not the case. The case is just the
opposite. Evil we meet with at every step in this universe. There is a lot of misery; there is
a lot of partiality; there is a lot of cruelty. And all these are found not in a tolerable degree
but in a degree extremely shocking. There is nothing wrong if we go to the length of
saying that evil is the law and good an exception in this universe, and thus acquiesce into
it. 1 But, then, how shall we justify our instinctive desire to get over the evil? It is a patent
fact that all sensible persons 1 intensely desire to get away and free themselve from this
evil. They leave no stone unturned in their efforts to secure this freedom. So it is no use
either acquiescing into it or totally denying it.

30. Other Vedantacaryas have tried in their own way to solve this problem of evil. Their
primary concern is not so much

to explain the evil in. this universe as to protect the Ultimate Reality or God from it. Sri
Samkaracarya sweeps the platform,..clean by denying this evil altogether. According to
him. this very world has got no existence, much less the evil therein. If the very rope-
serpent (a rope believed to be a serpant in .' the dark) does not exist, much less the
poison in its fang. As the rope remains absolutety untouched by the rope-serpent; and its
supposed poison, so his God or Brahman (by which ~ name he prefers to call his God)
too is absolutely free from 'the world (super-imposed on this Brahman) and the evil
supposed to be therein, but in reality not existing at all. As for Sri Ramanujacarya, the
souls and the world constitute God's body. So just as the soul remains untouched by the
defects of the body, so God remains untouched by the evil either in the , souls or in the
world. 50 his God also is free from the evil. ! As for Sri-Madhvacarya, God, the souls, and
the world are three distinct entities, so his God also is absolutely free from all evil. The
real problem is from the Sudhhadhvaita point of: view of Sri-Vallabhacarya. According to
him the souls are the real and not supposed parts of God; and the world is in reality ;
nothing but God in another form, as the ornaments are nothing but gold in another form.
As such the evil in the souls and in the world is as. much his as theirs. The body cannot
remain free from the defects of the leg. If the leg is lame, the body is bound to limp; it
cannot escape from that defect. If the golden ornament receives scratches, the gold in it is
bound to have them also and it cannot remain free from them. So it is not the other
Veda:ntacaryas, but it is rather Sri-Vallabhacarya that has to face the full force of the fire
point-blank. And he fully meets the challenge and in the way which is unique in the whole
field of Indian philosophical thought; for so far as my knowledge goes it is not to be found
anywhere else. ;

31. For a full appreciation of the way in which Sri-Vallabhacarya solves this problem of
evil, let us first state it at some length. According to SriVallabhcarya, God is both the

material as well as the eficient cause of the universe. Taking God to be the material cause
of the universe, we have to believe that He Himself has become the universe in the same
way as clay becomes a pot. Then just as clay and the pot are one, so God and the
universe are one. Now if there is evil in the universe, it is as much in God as in the
universe because they are one. Next, taking God to be the efficient cause, we have to
believe that He is responsible for all the evil in the universe. The misery and the cruelty in
this universe are all due to Him. Such a God ceases to be God who is free from all
defects. It is in this way that the non-theistic philo- sopbers assail the theistic ones. They
say: Some are very happy, e.g., the denizens of heaven; and others very unhappy, e.g.,
the denizens of hell. And even for one who denies such imaginary heaven and hell, there
is a lot of happiness and unhappiness in this day-to-day world of our actual experience.
Although unmixed ideal happiness is not to be found anywhere upon this earth, yet the
disparity is to be found in a marked degree. Some are relatively extremely happy,
Ythereas the lot of others is relatively extremely wretched. If all this is due to God, is He
not open to the charge of partiality? How can He boast, of His impartiality ? In the
Bhagavadgtta he says :

"Samo' ham sarva-bhutesu, na me dvesyo' sti na priyah"30

meaning "I am impartial towards all creatures. No one do I hate; no one do I love." But if
God is responsible for this disparity and the differential treatment of creatures, these
words of His become a meaningless idle boast. Moreover, if God is all- kind and a
veritable ocean of grace, why should He permit so much cruelty in the universe ? For
dualistic philosophers this is not a serious problem at all. Their theory is : God is God, and
the Universe is the Universe. They are eternally separate. All good belongs to God, and
all evil belongs to the universe. To explain the disparity they bring

in the different Karmas or actions of the different souls. God! is not responsible for them.
He is merely an administrator, a dispenser of justice. He is impartial in the real sense of
the term. According to Sri Vallabhacarya such a God, however, ceases to be God as He
has no freedom whatsoever of action. He is always bound by the Law of Karma. If He is
bound by Law, how is He free? If He is not free, how can He free others ? And if He
cannot free others, what is the use of approaching Him for seO.:uring freedom? Moreover,
the dualistic theory is incompatible with the omnipotence of God as has been shown in
foregoing pages. So the challenge has to be met with from purely non-dualistic point of
view. And Sri Vallabhacarya does it both ably and admirably.

32. He boldly says :

" Atmasrster na vaisamyam
Nairghrnyam capi vidyate"31

meaning "Because God himself has become universe, and tho. universe is nothing but
God Himself, either partiality or cruelty" has no scope whatsoever.'. This is how he frees
his God completely from every taint of evil. There is a real evil from our dualistic point no
doubt. And if we want to be absolutely happy, we have to go on shunning this evil, and we
have to goon and on doing so till that very evil ceases to be evil altogether. But from
God's strictly non-dualistic point of view, there is no possibility whatsoever of any evil in
the form of partiality and. cruelty. How this is so will be clear form the following few consi¬
derations. The evil attaching to God appears in two forms cruelty, and partiality. Of these
two, let us ffrst analyse tho nature of partiality. Now, even a slight thought will reveal that
partiality requires at least three intelligent persons; for an unintelligent object is never
open to any charge. At the most it is neutral. It is good if you make a good use of it., and
bad if you make a bad use of it. A, one person, can bo charged with partiality if he favours
B, another person, and

not C. a third person. Has such partiality any scope whatsoever in Suddhadvaita, Pure
Monism, where there is only one Ultimate Substance and that too without a second ? In
the same way, cruelty requires at least two persons. A, one person, is cruel to B, another
person, if the former ill-treats the latter. But has such cruelty also any scope in such a
Pure Monism ? Moreover A cannot be cruel to himself, according to the maxim,

"Nagner hi ta:po na himasya tat syat"32

meaning: The heat of fire is not painful, to fire itself, nor the coldness of ice is painful to
ice itself. Next let us turn to the nature of evil itself. As stated above a thing cannot be evil
to itself. So what scope is there for any evil whatsoever in the Suddhadvaita System of
Vedanta as envisaged by Sri-Vallabhacarya?

33. To drive the truth of this doctrine home a funny instance may be cited with advantage.
Our body is one. Althongh it is made up of many parts, we never feel that it is many. Now,
we always hold our head high above and keep our feet down below. But have we ever
had even the slightest idea that we are open to the 'charge of partiality on account of the
differential treatment of these two limbs ? And if some other person were to charge us
that way, would we mind him ? and, in order to absolve ourselves from that charge, would
we keep our legs high above and our head down below at least even for a few days ? Sri
Ramanujacarya would have with advantage utilized this illustration. For, according to him,
the souls and world constitute God's body.

34. By this time, it has been made sufficiently clear that this System of Suddhldvaita
Ved'a:nta not only finds full Vedic support, but it has at the same time full ration justi¬
fication. For first or all it completely satisfies the instinctive

internal hankering after some one unifying principle behind all these diverse phenomena
of our world of experience; and next, it alone makes abhaya or absolute freedom from all
fear possible. Moreover, not only does it absolve God from all taint of evil retaining at the
same time his Godhead immaculate, but it is also in complete consonance with the idea
of One Omnipotent Creator. Having dwelt so much on this one, the most important of all,
aspect of the Ultimate Reality, we may safely turn to other aspects thereof.

C HAP T E R IV
OTHER ASPECTS :

1. After dwelling at some length on the most important aspect of the Ultimate Reality,
namely, that it is one and with- out a second, we may with advantage consider the
following few aspects thereof too ;

(i) This Ultimate Reality is infinite and all-comprehensive.

(ii) The diverse names and forms to be found in this universe are but the manifestations of
the self-same Ultimate Entity. In other words that One Ultimate Entity has become Many,

(iii) The powers of this Ultimate Reality are simply incomprehensible. And one very
peculiar characteristic of this aspect is the fact that even the mutually conflicting qualities
can reside together in it.

(iv) This Ultimate Reality is endowed with all divine qualities. In other words, it is not
attribute-less as some other philosophers are disposed to think.

(v) The Ultimate Reality in both personal and impersonal. And the personal aspect
repeatedly incarnates itself.

(vi) All this activity is only a sport on the part of this Ultimate Reality.

2. Let us start with the first aspect, according to which, ihe Ultimate Reality is infinite and
all-comprehensive Sri- Vallabhacarya in his Tattva-dlpa-Nibandha describes the Ultimate
Reality in the following manner. And it will give us a good idea of its infinite and all-
comprehensive nature :

'The Ultimate Reality is Eternal Truth, Infinite knoweldge, and Infinite Joy. It is the
greatest, i. e. greater than any thing however great that we can think of. It is everywhere.
It is unchanging. It is omnipotent. It is quite independent, i e., though everything in this
universe depends on it, it depends on none. It is omniscient. It is independent of the
Prakirta- Gultas, namely. Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. On the other hand, these Gultas
themselves depend on it. In other words, these three Gut;las govern the universe, but
they in turn .are governed by this Ultimate Reality. It is one without difference, whether it
be Saja:tlya, Vijltiya, or Svagata. The difference between one male and another is
Sajltlya, j. e., one between the two members of the same class. That between a male and
a female is Vijatlya, i.e., one between two individuals belonging to two different classes.
And that between the various limbs of the same body is Svagata, i.e., one between the
different parts of one organism. The Ultimate Reality in its essence admits of none of
these differences. It is eternally and inherently endowed with an infinite number of virtues.
It sustains everything. The limitless power is ever ready at its beck and call. Maya, in the
System of Sri-Vallabhacarya, is this limitless power of the Ultimate Reality, wherewith it
accomplishes anything whatsoever with- {)ut the least exertion on its part. It is all Bliss. It
is the Best, the Highest both materially as well as spiritually. It can very easily be
distinguished from all fue objects to be found in this universe. It is the material as well as
the efficient cause of the universe. At times it carries its sport inside itself; at others it does
so outside itself

in the universe. Every such sport delights it. This Ultimate Reality controls both the
sentient souls as well as the non- sentient objects in this universe. It is endowed with
powers which are infinite and incomprehensible. The space, the time, the manner, the
matter, the instrument, the reason, the owner, the receiver, and what not ? Everyone of
these is the manifestation of this Ultimate Reality. It is everwhere. It is at the heart of
everything. It controls everything; and that too automatically without even touching it. It is
the soul of all. Everything constitutes its body, yet nothing knows it. It is from within
everything that it shines forth. Put all the systems of philosophy together, whether past;
present, or future. They will not comprehend it completely. None is, however, wrong as it
correctly comprehends some one or more of the different aspects of this Ultimate Reality.
Its forms are. infinite. It is changeless and also changing at the same time. It is the only
repository of all conflicting qualities. It is intellec- tually incomprehensible. It indulges in
revealing and concealing itself from time to time. In this way, it manifests and again takes
back into itself a number of forms in so rapid a succession that our intellect trying to know
it simply gets confounded. It cannot ordinarily be grasped by means of sense-organs.
Nevertheless, if it but wills so, it can be so grasped."1 Herein we find a very clear picture
of the Ultimate Reality as conceived by Sri-Vallabhacarya. And it does ample justice to
the infinite and incomprehensible nature of the Ultimate Reality.

3. Next we may turn to the rational consideration thereof. And for this we have to dive
deep into the enlightened human nature Itself. We are conscious of our ignorance. There
is a deep-seated urge within us to know more. We are not satisfied with half-knowledge.
As far as we can, we want to have an exact knowledge and that too fully. This full and
exact knowledge of various things, even when we have it to our

satisfaction, presents a very diversified picture of the universe. Not that this diversity does
not delight us. Nevertheless, we yearn for some simple principle unifying all these diverse
phenomena. We want to have a very simple yet at the same time a very comprehensive
principle that can explain all these diverse phenomena. The beauty of the theory of Albert
Einstein, of course in the field of physics, lies just in this. Such a theory is an approximate
description of the Ultimate Reality which governs all. Any intellectual pursuit whether
scientific or philosophical is an attempt to get nearer and nearer to it. The nearer and
nearer we get to it. the greater and greater is our progress. And in the following lines of
the auther of the 'Student's-History of Philosophy, we get a very beautiful picture of this
progress :

"When we at the present time first begin to think about the world in a conscious and
systematic way. we discover that our thought already has a tendency to follow certain
general lines, which seem to us natural, and sometimes almost inevitable. We find
ourselves familiar, e.g.. with the conception of a world of nature -a world wherein lifeless
and unconscious bits of matter group themselves according to unvarying laws. There are
a multitude of words which we use in speaking of this material world-thing or substance,
cause and effect, force, law. mechanism, necessity; and we suppose, ordinarily, that
these words convey a well-defined and obvious meaning. In like manner, there is the very
different world of the mental or conscious life, described by such terms as will, intellect,
feeling, sensation. This also has laws which it follows; only they are what we call
psychological, or logical, or ethical laws, in opposition to the physical laws of the outer
world. Finally, while there is no general agreement in our ultimate religious or
philosophical attempts to sum up the facts of reality, here too there are a few main
attitudes, or types of theory, within which our choice is confined, and which go by such
names as dualism, theism, idealism, materialism, pantheism, agnosticism. We do not find
it very difficult to understand in a general

way what these words mean, even .if we do not accept the theories for which they stand.

"These concepts, then, or notions which we frame to serve as short-hand expressions for
certain facts, or aspects of reality, come to us with so little labour on our part, that we
often are tempted to regard them as self-evident and certain to present themselves as the
manifest points of view whenever men stop to think. But a little examination will show that
this is a mistake. We are the heir of all the ages in our intellectual life, and so can utilize
the results of those who have gone before us. ...

"The History of Philosophy attempts to give an account of the more important and
comprehensive of these conceptions, in terms of which we are accustomed to think of the
world, and to trace the mental and social conditions out of which they took their rise. It is
an account of the growth of man's power to formulate the universe. When the subject-
matter of investigation is so enormous, we can only expect to approach the goal by zigzag
courses, hitting now upon the one aspect of the world, now upon another. In two obvious
ways, nevertheless, we may look for an advance. It may consist simply in bringing to light
some new point of view which before had been neglected, in abstracting some aspect of
things which had not hitherto been clearly isolated from the rest of experience. Or instead
of striking out such a new conception, we may try to combine more organically those
which the past history of philosophy has already succeeded in elaborating. Each of these
standpoints represents some significant feature which the world presents; and it is not till
all the manifoldness of the world has been distinguished, and grasped in an intellectual
form, that we are in a position to sum up our knowledge so that it shall fiiirly represent the
truth. "2

Now, compare the bold typed, portion above with that in Sri Vallabhlcarya's description of
the Ultimate Reality, which is as follows :

"Put all the systems of philosophy together, whether past, present, or future. They will not
comprehend it ( i. e., the Ultimate Reality) completly. None is, however, wrong as it
correctly comprehends some one or more of the different aspects of this Ultimate
Reality.."3

Do they not practically say the same thing? We can also with advantage compare the
above lines with the following ones of Dr. Annie Besant:

" each religion has its own special note, makes its own specia] contribution to the forces
working for the evolution of man. As we notice their differences, in addition to their simi¬
larities, we feel that they reveal a plan of human education just as when we hear a
splendid chord we feel that a master- musician has combined the notes, with a full
knowledge of the value of each. ..Surely the world is the richer for each, and we cannot
spare one jewel from our chaplet of the world's religions."4

Variety is the spice of life. The various aspects of the Ultimate Reality serve to enhance
its beauty. They are as much rea] as the Ultimate Reality itself. Sri-Vallabhacarya
respects all and rejects none. He simply seeks to assign every aspect its proper place in
the master-plan. Ignorance, limited view, and pride prevent us from appreciating this rich
variety. Humility combined with the openness of mind alone will enable one to fully
appreciate the rich beauty of the various mani- testations of One and the Same Ultimate
Reality, which though One can become Many because, of its intrinsic capacity to do so.
And there is no end to this Multiplicity. The infinite nature of the Ultimate Reality is on
close consideration found to be three-.fold. This Ultimate Reality is found to be infinite in
time, space, and substance. By saying that the Ultimate Reality (usually called Brahman)
though One becomes Many, and that this Many has no end, we mean to say that ilie
Ultimate Reality is infinite in substance. This means that it will go on becoming many, and
go on and on doing so till the very end

of time if -there is such an end, but the substance of the- Ultimate Reality will never get
exhausted. And it is this fact, that has been mentioned in the famous Upani~adic dictum.

"Purnasya Purnam adaya Purnam evavasisyate."5

meaning-Even though the Ultimate Reality has multiplied itself infinitely, yet its capacity to
do so is not exhausted, this capacity has remained intact. That it is infinite in time, is
saying the samething that it is eternal, that it did exist 1 at all times in the past, it does
exist, at present and it will continue to do so at all times in the future. In other words, it
exists at all times and even beyond. In still other, words, it is never non-existent. Of
destruction it knows nothing. And to say that this Ultimate Reality is infinite in space
means that it is inside space, it is outside space, and that it is even beyond space. In
other words, there is no place, either spiritual or material where this Ultimate Reality is not
already there. This fact of the infinite nature of the Ultimate Reality finds a very eloquent
expression in the following lines giving the outlines of Sri-Aurobindo Ghosh's Vedantic
Philosophy, who is a devotee of the Ultimate Reality in its feminine aspect:

"There are three ways of Her being in which it is possible., to be aware of Her. She has
three statuses :

"Transcendent, She is above all the worlds, linking the Supreme Being to all creation. She
it is who bears the Supreme in Her Consciousness, calls and holds the truths to be mani¬
fested and casts them into form. ...

"Universal, she spreads herself out as the substance and the soul of each universe of Her
creation. It is Her presence that gives life and meaning to All, Her movement that gives
the direction.

"Individual, She embodies in Herself both the transcendent and the univesal ways of Her
existence and makes their Power

operative here for the manifestation of the Divine in each individual form. She descends in
person into the world of Ignorance in order to uplift and release it from the Falsehood and
obscurity into which it has sunk.

"The Divine Mother has many aspects, many personalities that severally express the
plenitude of Her oceanic Being."6

The above lines eloquently express the infinite and all- comprehensive nature of the
Ultimate Reality as directly visualised by a great seert Sri-Aurobindo Ghosh, on this very
earth in this very life. And does this picture in any way differ from that given by Sri
Vallabhacarya? Thus, according to him. the Ultimate Reality, thought One, is nevertheless
capable of becoming infinitely Many. Any view of this Ultimate Reality falls short of it
because whereas this Ultimate Reality is infinite, any such view is bound to be finite,
because the mind that conceives it is limited and the language which describes it is still
more limited. That does not mean that any such view is wrong. No finite thing is unreal
because of its finitude. The finitude of anything is due more to the faulty nature of our own
perceiving apparatus, our limited mind. We think such a thing to be unreal because it slips
away from before us. .Such a thing appears to be unreal not because it is unreal but
because we are unable to hold it on. This is because we are ordinarily so constituted that
we ascribe our faults to others. While travelling in a train we think that the things around
us are moving. But what is moving in reality? The things around us or we ourselves? We
see the sun go from East to West7 But do we ever see that the earth on which we live
goes from West to East? To cite an illustration from psychology, let us take the following
instance: Suppose after a lot of mental effort we arrive at the solution of a very difficult
mathematical or philosophical problem, and we forget it the next day. Whose fault is it?
Ours or of the problem? The same is the case when we think that the objects of our
experience are finite or unreal. When the spiritual powers are

developed, we begin to have a wider and wider vision. And thereafter our ordinary views
are completely changed. Thus we see how Sri-Vallabhacarya views the Ultimate Reality.

4. Now, let us take up the next aspect. According to this, the diverse names and forms are
but the different manifestations of the self-same One Ultimate Reality. For the clear
descrip- tion of this aspect also, we can very well, have a recourse to the following lines
outlining the Vedantic Philosophy of Sri- Aurobindo ahosh :

"The Divine has projected the universe out of His own Being with a purpose. That purpose
is to manifest Himself His inalienable nature of Existence, Consciousness, and Bliss,
saccidananda. ...

" ...He is there in every creature, in every point of Space' and in every moment of Time,
supporting all as the sadatman" an impersonal Self. All are Names and Forms on the
bosom of this Self.

" ...Not only are all things in the Self, but the Self too. is in all of them. It is That which
makes the Names and Forms live and real.

" ...It is He who has put out this universe from the in- finitude of His being."7

The view of Sri-Vallabhacarya is also just the same. Now" let it be humbly admitted' at the
outset, that is not possible- to demonstrate all this. And the very Revelation, the Veda
itself, humbly admits its inability to do so :

"Yato vaco nivartante Aprapya manasa saha"8

Neither the words nor the mind can reach it. It is, like the health of the body, something to
be felt; and not something to be seen by ourselves or to be shown to others.. At best it
can

be described but not demonstrated. But in order to dilute the dogmatic character thereof,
the matter may be presented as rationally as possible.

5. To do so let us consider the following: Let us suppose that there are four objects A, B,
C, D all different from one another. That all of them are different is a fact. But does the
thing end there? Is there not anything common to all of them? Let us examine them much
more closely. We know that A is, B is, C is, and D is. Is not the fact of this isness common
to all? If it is so, it comprehends all the four. Thus this isness becomes comprehensive.
Again, does the matter end with this is-ness? Where is this is-ness if we have no
knowledge thereof ? Then this knowledge becomes still more comprehensive. It
comprehends the is-ness over and above A, B, C and D. But the thing does not end even
here. After knowing a thing, either we like or dislike it. And these likes and dislikes
constitute the very dynamics of all activity whether physical or mental. If the all-
comprehensive Reality has to be sought in this world of our experience, it is to be sought
in these three directions. That is why the Sruti describes Brahman or the Ultimate Reality
as saccidananda, Existence, Know- ledge, and Bliss. These to a limited extent are to be
found even in the universe. But in Brahman they are infinite. And incidentally it may be
mentioned that it is because of this very wide and rational conception of the Ultimate
Reality or God that the Indian Religion has become most tolerant. In every finite object,
these three are always present. And the degree thereof in each will decide which is a
greater and which is a lesser manifestation of the Ultimate Reality. But one fact emerges
very clearly that all objects are the manifestations of the Ultimate Reality. And this fact
admits of no exception. It is just because of this that the Indian Religion respects all alike.
The famous Gita dictum.

"Vasudeva sarvam iti
Sa mahatma sudurlabhah 9

boldly declares that God is everything and everything is God, stating at the same .time
that persons having so lofty a vision are very very rare. Moreover this spirit of veneration
and worship is much more important than the object of such veneration and worship. A
person may worship any object he likes. For him that object is all right. But the belief that
that object alone will liberate, and the others will not, is foreign to the Spirit of Indian
Religion. It is the worship that liberates and. Dot the object. This is the cardinal principle of
the Indian Religion. The well-known stanza :

Kasthe na vidyate devo,

Na silayam na mrnmaye;

Bhavena vidyate devo, .

Tasmad bhavo hi Karanam."10

meaning ..God resides neither in wood, nor in stone, nor in clay. But he resides there
because of the spirt of veneration which a devotee has towards it. So this spirit of
veneration alone counts and nothing else." Very beautifully enunciates this principle.
Worships any object you like. But worship it or follow it wholeheartedly, i.e., surrendering
yourself unconditionally. The Indian Religion does not believe in Religious conversion as
generally understood. It aims at only one thing: Be better. Let Hindus be better Hindus,
Mohammedans better Mohammedans, and Christians better Christians. The Indian
Religion reveres a sincere Mohammedan or Christian more than an insincere Hindu.
According tothe Indian Religion it is the sincerity which matters and " not the form of
belief. Behaviour and not belief constitutes the very core of Real Religion. Such a Religion
ALONE can be truly democratic.

6. The point to be considered next is how this One Ultimate Reality becomes Many. As
has already been stated no demonstration is here possible. But a rational explanation
based on analogies can be held forth, admitting of course that an analogy

is no argument; as there is no guarantee that what happens in one case also happens in
another. Nevertheless it will dispel the idea that a particular happening is impossible,
which we are disposed to think when that particular happening happens to be unusual.
Moreover it should not be forgotten that whatever is here stated with regard to the
Ultimate Reality derives its strength from the Revelation and not from Reason. Here the
Reason is merely a hand-maid of Revelation. It merely shows that the matters mentioned
in the Revelation which in our ignorance we are disposed to think as impossible are not
altogether impossible in the universe. Coming to the point, take first the instance of air. Is
is chemically one and the same. But, physically, vibrations of different frequencies do
arise in it. which give rise to. different notes. Further the different permutations and
combinations of these notes give rise to an infinite variety of chords either full of harmony
or of discord. The former constitute the sweetest music but the .latter happen to be jarring
to our ears. How and why all this? Is there any satisfactory answer to this? We accept the
thing as it is. Next, let us consider the case of electricity. Electrons and protons are its
ultimate constituents. They are physically the same everywhere. They combine in
different proportions; and the elements of Chemistry arise. These elements in turn
combine in different proportions; and the chemical compounds arise. Moreover electricity
is a form of energy. Does it not give rise to matter in this way? And does matter not exhibit
properties which are quite distinct from those of energy? Moreover, does the energy in the
form of matter not become a receptable of the energy in the form of energy, something
like water in a cup of ice? How and why all this? Next, let us turn to biology. Take for
instance the egg of a peacock. The juice inside it has one and the same colour. But, does
not a few days' hatching turn this liquid into a solid young peacock having a plumage of
the richest and the most variegated physical colours? How and why all this,? To take
another instance from the same science, let us

consider how a human body is formed. The male sperm and the female ovum combine
giving rise to a protoplasm. This protoplasm becomes transformed into different cells,
some of which can build only bones and others only blood. Who so? Further, all these
give rise to the brain, the seat of the human mind, one of the most wonderful objects in
the universe. This mind in its turn is a store-house of an infinite variety of ideas. These
ideas again are both dependent on and independent of the objects outside, In., the
waking state, we see a book; and the idea of a book arises in our mind; but in a dream,
there is no such book; nevertheless sometimes there does arise the idea of a book which
in no way differs from that of the waking state. From all these instances it becomes amply
clear that the fact of one becoming many together with the fact of that many having
properties different from those of that one is not something impossible in Nature. It is in
some such way that the Ultimate Reality which is One becomes Many. And, in this
connection, it will be well to quote the following words of J. B. S. Haldane, an eminent
British Scientist:

"However life originated in the remote past, more than a thousand million years ago,
nowadays one living creature is always derived from another, ort in the case of sexual
reproduction, from two others. And there arc good reasons to think that all or almost all
living things were derived from a single original."11

7. Now let us turn to the third aspect. According to this, the powers of the Ultimate Reality
are simply miraculous, i.e., such as cannot be comprehended by human intellect. And one
very peculiar characteristic of this aspect is the fact that even the mutually conflicting
qualities are to be found residing together therein. For the full grasp of this aspect, let us
first turn to the nature of the Utlimate Reality as it to be had from the Vedic Scriptures, not
only every part but even every

letter of which is equally authoritative according to the Orthodox Belief. Now, one
Striptural Passage

"Na caksusa grhyate"12

states that no eye can see this Ultimate Reality. But another

"Kascid dhirah pratyagatmanam aiksat"13
states that some wise man did see it. A third passage

"Nlpi vaca"14

states that the words cannot describe it. But a fourth passage-
"Sarve Veda yat padam amanati"15

states that all the Vedas describe it. And these Vedas are nothing but words. A fifth
passage

"Aprapya manasl saha"16
states that even mind can not reach it. But a sixth passage

"Manasaivedam ptavyam"17

states that it is with the help of the mind alone that this Ultimate Reality has to be
reached. A seventh passage

"Agandham arasam"18

describes it as having neither smell nor taste. But an eighth passage :

"Sarvagandhah sarvarasah .'19

speaks of it as having all smells and all tastes. And a number of similiar passages can be
added to the list. Here we find conflicting qualities mentioned in different passages. But
there are other passages where the conflicting qualities are to be- found together in one
and the same passage. Take, for instance" the passage

'.Anotorantyan mahato mahryan.'20

meaning that this Ultimate Reality is smaller than the small and bigger than the big. Or the
passage.

"Tad dtire tad u antike"21

meaning that this Ultimate Reality is both far as well as near. Innocent child-like faith may
accept such conflicting statements no doubt. But can honest intelligence do so? To grasp
well the difficulties of honest intelligence, let us take the following Laws of Thought into
consideration. We shall find a very fine presentation thereof in the following lines Milton :

"Laws of Thought are certain fundamental and necessary principles which lie at the basis
of reasoning. They are fundamental and necessary because they are assumed in all
processes of reasoning exercised upon the facts of the real world, and because we
cannot conceive them reverse or knowingly violate them. ...

"Since the time of Aristotle, three such principles or laws have been recognised : the
principal of identity, the principal of contradiction, and the principle of excluded middle.

"The Principle of Identity -The simplest statement of this law is the formula A. is A. ...

'.The Principle of Contradiction -This principle, which would be better named the principle
of non-contradiction, is most simply expressed by the, formula A cannot both be B and not
be B.

"...It denies that the same thing can, at the same time, both possess a certain attribute
and not possess it; and, as thought must be self- consistent, that we can conceive a thing
as at once both possessing and not possessing the same attribute. ...

"The Principle of Excluded Middle -The principle of excluded middle between two
contradictory propositions is most clearly expressed by saying A either is, 'or is not, 8."22

Now, if the Scriptural Passages quoted above are all taken to be literally true, the Second
Law of Thought is evidently violated. For, according to this law Brahman, i.e., the Ultimate
Reality, is either such as can be seen or such as cannot be seen, it can never be both.
But the Sruti, i.e., the Vedic Scripture, asserts that it is both. In such a contingency, either
we have to disregard logic in order to respect both the sets of passages by accepting their
literal meaning or to. reject the literal meaning of one set of passages in order to be
faithful to logic and thus to disregard that particular set of passages. Then let us see what
the different exponents of the Sruti have done in the matter.

8. Let us start with Sri-Samkaracarya. He bases his VedKntic doctrine on the Sruti-
passage.

"Sad eva, Somya, idam agre Ksid, ekam eva advitlyam"23

meaning "Oh gentle lad, in the beginning, i.e. at the time when this, universe had not
come into perceptible existence as yet, the Sat, i.e., the Ultimate Reality , alone existed
the only one and that too without a second." He has followed the meaning of this Sruti-
passage too literally. The best exposition of his Vedantic doctrine is to be found in his
following stanza :

"Na caikam tadanyad dvitlyam kutahsyat,

Na va kevalatvam na cakevalatvam;

Na sunyam na casunyam advaitakatvat,

Katham? Sarva-Vedanta-siddham bravlmi."24

meaning " As regards the Ultimate Reality, we cannot even say that it is one, How then
can we say that there is something other besides it? We cannot even say that it is
absolutely one. How then call we say that it is otherwise, i.e., not absolutely

.one ? We cannot even say that is it completely non-existent. How then can we say that it
is not completely non-existent ? How all this? Such a question need not be raised as what
I have said has full support of all the Upansads." Sri-Samkaracarya's Ultimate Principle is
One Knowledge or Consciousness, pure and simple. There is not even the mental
bifurcation of the knower and the thing known. For such a bifurcation is bound to destory
absolute oneness. And the Sruti-passage means just such abso- lute oneness. To convey
the oneness of the Ultimate Reality the word "eva" meaning "only" after "sat" was quite
sufficient. Why should it pile up, otherwise, such words a "ekam eva, advitlyam" meaning
"only one and that too without a second" ? The literal meaning of this Scriptural Passage
and the Logical Second Law of Thought constitute the two columns on which Sri-
Samkkarcarya's Philosophical Arch stands. The Sruti- passage says that the Ultimate
Reality is one and the Logical Second Law of Thought says that if the Ultimate Reality is
one, it is always one and never many. So the idea of Many is an illusion. The direct
corollary of this doctrine is that this universe where we find a lot of diversity is an illusion.
And Sri-Samkaacarya is so very staunch in this belief of his that he boldly defies even the
Sutrakara. The occasion where he does so is as follows: The Sutrakara defines Brahman
or Ultimate Reality as one that has created this universe. But this fact is assailed by the
opponent in this way: Granted that Brahman has create;d this universe. Further, granted
that this very Brahman has transformed itself into the form of this universe. Now, a crucial
question arises: Has Brahman completely transformed itself into the form of this universe
? If so, nothing of Brahman remains behind. Then if liberation is the fruit of knowing
Brahman, as nothing of Brahman has remained, how to know, it and how to get
consequent liberation pose a serious problem. And if liberation becomes impossible,
good- bye to that Vedantic doctrine which, instead of securing, directly destroys its .goal.
To escape such a contingency, If we believe that a part of Brahman has remained as
Brahman in its perfect

purity, and only the remaining part has transformed itself into the form of the universe, this
will make Brahman to be made of parts. But such a position will create two other
difficulties. First, this will go against the Sruti-passage

"Niskalam niskriyam slntam niravadyam niranjanam'!2~

saying that this Ultimate Reality is impartite, i.e., not made up of parts. And, secondly,
what is made up of parts is bound to disintegrate and get destroyed like our houses,
clothes, and even our bodies. To meet such a challenge the Sotraklra hurls his last
weapon on the opponent's head by saying that the Scriptures are his sheet-anchor. If they
say 'day' it is day; 'night' it is night. "The~e's not to reason why, There's but to do and
die."26 The spiritual discipline is as strict,as or perhaps stricter than the military discipline.
I am again tempted to quote the following lines from S..I Aurobindo ahosh :

"I give this example to show how these things work; it is not in the calculated way the
human reason wants -to lay down, but by a more mysterious and greater law."27
All this the Sntrakara says in his famous Sotra

"Srutes tu Sabda-mulatvlt"28

meaning "Our belief proceeds from what is laid down in scrip- tures; and the scriptures
are our first and our last resort." Srl-Sali 1 karlcarya while commenting upon this Sutra,
first, very faithfully explains the Sutraklra's viewpoint as follows :

Brahman or the Ultimate Reality can be known through the Scriptures and Scriptures
alone. The sense-organs together with the mind are of no help whatsoever in this matter.
Hence the nature of the Ultimate Reality has to be ascertained with the help of the
Scriptures alone. In doing so, if something goes against logic, logic has to be set aside.
For, after all, logic is the product of the limited mind, whereas the Ultimate Reality
transcends all limits. The Scriptures speak of Brahman

as having parts and having no parts, And we have to accept Brahman as being both,
disregarding of course the logical inconsistency involved therein. To cite analogies from
our own\ experience let us turn to miraculous gems, sacred formulas, wonderworking
herbs, and similar other objects. At different times and at different places they exhibit
efficacies which bring . about results which are mutually incongruous. (Such things,
though extremely rare nowadays, were not so in the days of .. Sri-Samkaracarya, who
himself was one of such wonder- workers.) To know of such efficacies, of their invariable
con comitants, and of the conditions under which they work, one ; has to approach an
instructor. For, no amount of rational thinking will enable one to do so. Will it, then be
possible to know about the Ultimate Reality, which lies beyond human speech and
thought, without instruction and simply with the help of logical reasoning ? That is why the
repositories of ancient lores aver: "Where the objects lie beyond the ken of human
intelligence, one should not resort to logical reasoning. For, the very meaning of 'lying
beyond the ken of human in- tellig~nce' is that no amount of logical reasoning will enable
one to know about such objects.' So, the Scriptures alone will enable one to ascertain
correctly the nature of the Ultimat- Reality. But immediately thereafter, he proceeds his
own way and adds as follows :

By saying that in matters lying beyond the ken of human intelligence, the Scriptures are
final, and as such what they say has to be accepted as it is regardless of the fact whether
what they say is logically consistent or inconsistent, one can silence the opponent, no
doubt. But that does not mean that the Scriptures are entitled to make even illogical and
inconsistent statements like a mad man. If they did so, who would have held them in so
high an esteem ? So, some sensible way has to be found out to remove this logical
inconsistency. And there does exist one such way. Thereby no injustice will be done
either to the Scriptures or to the Logic. And that way

is as fonows : An imiginary problem is no problem at all. There is no need seriously to
mind the mental condition of a person who is afraid of a rope-snake (a rope believed to bo
a serpent in the dark). Nor is there any serious need to make strenous efforts to kill such
a serpent. The same is the case with the problem under consideration. If the world is real
and Brahman has really transformed itself into tho form of this universe, then the problem
under consideration arises. But in reality, there is no real transformation, and there is no
real world. The world is merely an appearance like a rope-snake. For the Sruti-passage
has. declared Brahman or the Ultimate Reality not only to be one but that too without a
second. And logically what is one is always one and never many. So what appears as
many has no existence whatsoever. Moreover the one without-a-second Brahman has not
even real attributesL For the existence of real attributes would curtail the second-
lessness of the substance. So the question whether Brahmarl; has parts or is partless
also does not arise, Hence the pre- sent problem is entirely baseless. This win make it
absolutely clear that Sri-Samkaracarya attaches greater importance too logical
consistency than to the literal meaning of all the passages of the Scriptures. He accepts
the literal meaning of the passage,

"Sad eva, Somya, idam agre asld, ekam eva advitryam"29

meaning 'Oh gentle lad, the Ultimate Reality alone, only one and that too without a
second, existed in the beginning" and. that of others having the same import, rejecting at
the same time the literal meaning of all the remaining passages. It is. in this way that he
resolves the conflict of the various. Sruti- passages. And in doing so, as has been shown
above, he goes to the length of defying even the Sutrakara.

9. Next, we may see how Sri-Ramanujacarya, an equany great personality, resolves this
problem. The close observation

of what has been discussed above reveals that the conflict can take two distinct forms: (I)
That raised by the Sutrakara, himself, namely, whether the whole of the Ultimate Reality
has transformed itself into the form of the universe or only a part thereof has done so.
This together with the consequent difficulties is one form of this conflict. And (2) whether
the Ultimate Reality bas or has no attributes. This is the second form of the conflict. The
first form of the conflict has little scope in the Vedlntic System of Sn-R§manuj~c!rya. In his
System, it is not God that transforms himself .into the form of the universe; rather it is
God's body alone that undergoes such transformation. So even after transformation the
substance of God remains intact. So it is the second form of the con- fiict that needs
consideration in detail. There are certain Scriptural Passages which say that the Ultimate
Reality has got attributes. There are others which say that it has got no attributes. If both
the sets of passages are taken literally, the logical inconsistency is' evident. For a thing
cannot both have attributes and no attributes at the same time. A person cannot be both
present and absent at the same time. To remove this logical inconsistency Srl-
R!mD:nuj!carya suggests a very intelli- gent way. He says that in the passages where the
Ultimate Reality is said to have attributes, we have to understand divine attributes; and in
the passages where it is said to have no attributes, we have to understand mundane
ones. Thus what the Sruti wants to say is that the Ultimate Reality has divine attributes
only and the mundane ones. And then there remains no logical difficulty. A person may be
present physically and at the same time can be absent mentally. And let it be said
incidentally that if the Si1frakD:ra and Sn-VallabhD:carya were asked to choose between
the respective v.'ays of Sn-Samkara- <:arya and Sn-RD:manujacarya, they would
certainly prefer that of the latter. For, in the former, with the exception of a few, practically
all the scriptural passages are deprived of their literal meaning; whereas in the latter the
literal sense of all the passages remains intact.

10. What has been stated in the few foregoing section will serve as an excellent
introduction for grasping the somewhat unusual views of Sri Vallabhacarya in the matter.
In order to grasp these views of Sri Vallabhacarya fully and clearly one ought always to
keep befere one's mind his extreme regard for the Vedic Scriptures and his extreme faith
in the omni- potence of the Almighty. For him even every letter of the Vedas is sacred.
The meaning that is yielded by all these pas~ages after taking all of them in their literal
sense constitutes his Vedantic Philosophy. If there appears any logical .inconsistency in
the doctrines arrived at in this way, his Almighty Lord is there with all his omnipotence to
remove it in his most mysterious being. His dicta in this connection are :

" Acintyananta-saktimati sarvabhavana-samarthe
Brahmani virodhabhavac ca"30 .

and

"Sarvabhava-samarthatvad acintyaisvaryavad Brhat."31

wherein it is stated that the Omnipotent Almighty can be any- thing whatsoever, even the
repository of mutually inconsistent attributes. His powers are simply miraculous. They
cannot be comprehended by means of our minds. For our minds are limited whereas his
powers are unlimited. And, after all, what is Logic ? It is a construction of our limited
minds. How can it limit the limitless ? Faith alone can grasp this limitless substance.
Mathematics is the most exact of all sciences. " Does its conception of Infinity rest on
intellectual grasp ? Can this Infinity be reached ? Has it not been taken on trust then ? Not
only Sri Vallabhacarya, but the Sutrakara also has rejected it in matters extra-mundane in
his famous Sutra

"Srutes tu Sabda-mulatvat"32

meaning that Sruti or Revelation is the sheet-anchor. Sri Vallabhacarya's respect for the
Sruti has already eeen referred to. He cannot disrespect a single letter thereof. Not only
this

he believes the Sruti to be perfect besides this. He does not only like to subtract anything
from the Sruti, he cannot brook any addition to it also. This is the reason why he does not
whole-heartedly subscribe to the view of Sri-Ramanujacarya. For the latter, when he says
that in the Sruti-passages where the Ultimate Reality is spoken of as having attributes, we
have to understand them as divine attributes, adds the word 'divine'. Sri-Vallabhacarya
does not brook this addition even; for such an addition means that the Sruti is lacking to
that extent. According to him. if we at all want to trust the Scriptures, let us do so whole¬
heartedly. When a true devotee sets up an idol.he whole-heartedly believes it to be God
in spite of its apparent limitations. The same should be our attitude towards the
Scriptures. Idols and Scriptures may have limitations. But that does not mean that our
Faith too should have limitations. And just as the absolute faith of a devotee draws the
divinity out of the idol, in the same way the absolute faith in these: Scriptures will draw the
essential truth out of them. And such a belief is not merely an idle piece of imagination. It
is a solid fact on the other hand. Swami Sri-Ramakrsna Paramahamsa had demonstrated
it in his own life; and Swami Vivekananda had boldly proclaimed it to the whole world. And
this too not in a distant past, but in the very century preceding the present one. If at all we
want to trust, let us do so whole-heartedly. Half-measures never succeed. And it is with
such absolute faith that Sri-Vallabhacarya approaches the Scriptures. If this point is
grasped clearly, it will not at all be difficult to either understand or appreciate his views.

11. Now. we can very well proceed to consider the way in which '" Sri-Vallabhacarya has
arrived at the very unusual view as regards the nature of the Ultimate Reality, technically
known as Virurdhadharmasraya-Vada, the Doctrine of Mutually Conflicting Qualities
residing in One and the Same Substance: And this way is as follows: While interpreting
the Scriptures.

84 .

Sri-Vallabhacarya wants to show equal respect to all the passages. To attach very great
importance to some one passage and then to subordinate all the remaining ones to that is
quite alien to his nature. And this is just what Sri-Samkaracarya does. And that is just why
Sri.Vallabhacarya unreservedly criticises the latter. But as for the latter's personality he
has a very high regard. For this latter is, by him, believed to be an incarnation of Lord
Samkara, the last member of the Divine Trinity, Sri-Samkaracarya attaches the greatest
importance to the Scriptural Passage :

"Sad eva, Somya, idam agre asid, ekam
eva advitiyam"33

.meaning "Oh gentle lad, in the beginning there was the Ultimate Reality alone, only One
and that too without a second." :But he neglects the passage :

"Tad aiksata 'Bahu syam, prajayeya' iti "34

meaning that Ultimate Reality wished to become Many, to multiply itself" which
immediately follows this first passage. The other passages that follow them and describe
how this One Ultimate Reality became Many share the same fate at his hand. Had he
attached equal importance to all these latter passages, as has been done by Sri Vallabh-
acarya, no trouble would have arisen at all. The fact that that One without-a- second
Ultimate Real;ty has also the inherent capacity of becoming Many at the same time would
have immediately followed and the way would have been smooth throughout. Logic limits
our thinking process only. It does not limit the inherent capacity of thing. Where there are
a husband and a wife, Logic will prevent us from taking them to be three instead of two.
But it does not say that they will always remain two and not become three by an addition
to the family. But Sri- Samkaracaryas's excessive adherence to Logical consistency ties
him up to this One without-a-second Ultimate Reality, with

the ultimate result that he not only has to disregard a major portion of Scriptural Passages
but has also to declare this universe to have no reality at all. Thus it is his excessive-
adherence'to logical consistency which has dragged him into the mire of illusionism. Sri-
Vallabhcarya on the other hand, respecting all the passages concerned, endows his
Ultimate reality, which is only One and that too without a second, with the inherent
capacity of becoming Many not in appearance only but in reaility. And thus, the world for
him becomes a solid reality. He too believes in Maya no doubt. For the Scriptural
Passage:

"Indro mayabhih puru-rupa lyate"35

meaning that "God, who is one, appears to have many forms because of many Mayas",
expressly speak not of only one Maya but of many Mayas. But this Maya of Sri- Vallabha-
carya is not one which covers reality and sets up an unreality in, its place. It is, according
to him, the inherent capacity of that One Ultimate Reality; whereby it becomes Many in
reality. Thus, according to him the world with all its diversity is as much real as the
Ultimate Reality which is One and without a second. Thus, according to him, there is no
difference between the present world and the past Ultimate Reality. The gold of the ingot
and that of the ornament are one and the same. AH' the forms into which the gold can be
cast are as much real as the gold. All these forms are already present in the gold. They
inhere it. Had they not been there, it would lead us to a doctrine of the creation ex nihilo,
i.e., creating something out of nothing. But the Upanisadic dictum :

"Katham asatah sat jayeta"36

meaning "How can anything come out of nothing?" directly repudiates it. So, according to
Sri-Vallabhacarya, the present universe was already there in the Ultimate Reality. It is not
something new. Thus, just as his respect for all the Scriptural Passages has enabled him
to arrive at this bold Realism, in the same way this very respect of his all the. Scriptual
Passages

enables him to arrive at his extra-ordinary doctrine of Viruddha- dharmasraya, in other
words, the doctrine of the Mutually Conflicting Qualities residing side by side in One and
the same substance. As cited above one Scriptural Passage speaks of Brahman as
devoid of all smells and all tastes, whereas another speaks of it as having all smells and
all tastes. According to the Second Law of Thought, technically known as the law of
Contradiction, this is not possible. We cannot mentally conceive any such thing. But by
equally respecting these two passages, i.e. taking them to be literally true, Sri-
Vallabhacarya both boldly believes and even declares that, Brahman is both having and
not having these qualities.. Why ? Because the Sruti says so. If we fail to grasp this
intellectually, it is rather the fault of our intellect. To set limitations to the incomprehensibly
miraculous power of the Ultimate Reality simply because our intellectual powers are
limited, will never bring about liberation, the ultimate goal of all the philosophical systems.
To learn to swim requires to leave the firm ground below our feet, and to take a head-long
plunge. The same is true of liberation. We have to leave the logical certainty. And it is just
here that the Faith is needed. Faith can comprehend anything and everything. Its powers
are sweeping. Its range is limitless. Faith is needed even in Mathematics, the most exact
of all sciences. Will our imagination ever find out the point where the two parallel straight
lines meet ? Will our intellect ever find the quotient when a number is divided by zero ?
Why does Mathematics, the most rational and exacting of all Sciences, believe in the
point at infinity in one case, and infinity itself in the other ? Can this infinity be
demonstrated ? Neverthe- less, the Mathematics has to believe in it. This is nothing .hut
Faith. At best we can call this an Intelligent Faith. It is resorted to only when we realise the
limitations of our intellect. Mahatma Gandhi means the same thing when he writes "My life
is largely governed by reason and when it fails, it is governed by a superior force, that is
faith.'.37

Sri-Vallabhacarya's Faith also is an Intelligent Faith and not a Blind Faith. He believes in
human efforts, both physical and mental. His famous dictum :

"Prayatna-paryantam Jiva-krtyam"38

meaning "One has to try one's utmost" categorically lays this down. "Where human efforts
end, there divine efforts begin." This is a very important truth. Human efforts are a vital
link in the chain. Without them the chain will sap asunder. It is only after all the human
energy has been spent that the divine energy will begin to flow in. When a seed has once
been sown by human hands, then alone all the natural forces necessary to multiply it are
set free. Without the seed being sown, .all these latent forces are helpless. The human
efforts alone will open the doors for the divine efforts to come in. Faith in the divine is the
continuation of the faith in the human. God helps the helpless. But this helplessness is of
a sterner stuff. It arises after all the available help in the form of all possible human efforts
is totally expended, idle faith is no faith according to Sri-Vallabhacarya. It is another form
of mental inertia. It hinders rather than helps. Seva or selfless service is his ideal of life.
This Seva means incessant activity. It is traditionally reported that Sri-Vallabhacarya slept
only for two hours. And at times he had to deny even this lit tie luxury to himself.'l have
done my little duty with my limited strength. Now God out of his infinite Grace is sure to do
his duty with his unlimited strength." Such is the nature of Sri-Vallabhacarya's Faith. And it
is this faith "that has led him to respect every letter of the Vedas and to believe in the
Omnipotence and the Infinite Grace of God. Of course; this Faith of his was instinctive as
all genuine Faiths are. Faith is the very substance of a soul, according to the
Bhagavadgita:. It says :

"Sraddhamayo'yam purusah"39

meaning "The soul is made up of faith". Faith is just reliance on something. It is something
like seeking a well. You have to select a spot and start digging just there, and go .on
doing so till the water is reached. Changing spots frpm time to time will result in sheer
waste of time and energy. No water will ever be reached. The same is the case with the
realisation of God. He is like water. Just as many layers of earth intervene between the
seeker of the well and the water, in the same way many factors intervene between the
aspirant and God. He has to base his faith somewhere and has to stick to it till he finds
God. Now, if Sri-Vallabhacarya had to base his faith somewhere, where else was he to
base it except on the Scriptures which, though interpreted differently, were equally
respected by all his noble contemporaries as well as predecessors? And when once it
was based, it had to be thorough. This is the only thing that can be said in justification of
Sri- Vallabhacarya's faith in Scriptures. His great predecessors, Sri-Samkaracarya and
Sri-Ramanujacarya had the same faith in Scriptures. The difference lay only in their
attitudes, which were due to the different times in which they flourished. The times of Sri-
Samkaracarya were those of Buddhist dialecticians. Had he talked like Sri-Vallabhacarya,
nobody would have heard him. Sri Ramanujacarya was better-placed in this respect. His
atmosphere was sanctified by the Votaries of the Veda and the Alvars. Coming to the
point, we can see how Sri-Vallabhacarya's unalloyed Faith in the Scriptures has enabled
him to stem the tide of logical inconsistency involved in believing that Brahman or the
Ultimate Reality has both attributes and no attributes and in how One can become many.
Now what remains to be done is to find some rational justification for this peculiar attitude
which openly flouts logic and believes what is ordinarily unbelievable. And in this
connection, I can do nothing better than quote the following lines by J.B.S. Haldane, an
eminent British scientist:

"Life, then, seems to be a synthesis of two opposites, mechanism and individuality. A man
is a machine, and at the

same time an individual. There is nothing really surprising ilt this. We find the same union
of opposites everywhere. Wood is. both hard and soft. It it were not hard, we could not
use it .for furniture. If it were not soft, we could not cut it. ...

"We see then that life is an extra-ordinary bundle OF CONTRADICTIONS. It is something
between mechanism and individuality, between chance and purpose, between happy but
itagnant perfection, and struggling but evolving imperfection. ... It is a constant struggle
against death, yet without death it could not progress.

"The philosopher tries to define it, but no definition will cover its infinite and self¬
contradictory variety. The biologist studies it, well aware that he can never hope to fathom
its complexity."4o

Scientists, like J. B. S. Haldane, have through keen observation and strictly scientific
methods, come to such conclusions. In what way do these conclusions differ from those
to which Sri Vallabhacarya has arrived at through instinctive faith in the Scriptures and
through a uniform respect for all the passages thereof?

12. Now we may take up the fourth aspect. According to this aspect the Ultimate Reality is
endowed with at! divine qualities. In other words, it is not attribute-less as some other
philosophers are disposed to think. In foregoing sections it has been repeatedly told that
with our limited mental apparatus it is not possible for us to fathom mysteries surrounding
the nature of the Ultimate Reality. For that we have to turn to the words of those who had
been face to face with God, the Ultimate Reality, through his Grace. And our Scriptures
are such words. They say:

"Sad eva, Somya, idam agre asid, ekam eva advittyam".

meaning "Oh gentle lad, in the beginning there existed the Ultimate Reality alone, only
one without a second." Here it would have been quite sufficient to say that there was in
the beginning this Ultimate Reality alone. Then why the words "ekam eva advitJyam"
meaning "only one and that too without a second ?" The Scriptures being divine are
perfectly immaculate: They would not repeat anything unnecessarily. So these additional
words have got some additional significance. And that significance appears to be this:
The substance is fundamental. Without that our thought does not proceed at all. Now,
when we begin to think about a substance its attributes begin to attract our attention. They
are different from the substance. For the substance is one, whereas these attributes are
many. Moreover the substance is a whole, whereas these attributes are parts. And thus
being different they become second to So when the Sruti says that the Ultimate Reality
was One without a second, by the word "second" they mean "an attribute." So the
Passage under consideration wants to state that the Ultimate Reality has in the beginning
not even attributes. And it was only when this Ultimate Reality became many and
multiplied itself that these attributes came into being. And, according to Sri-Vallabhacarya,
there was in the days of the Sutrakara, a school of Vedic Exponents who did hold such a
view. Incidentally, we may mention here that Sri-Samkaracarya being an absolute monist,
believes that the Ultimate Reality has no attributes whatsoever. If they appear, they are
illusory. Coming to the point, according to Sri-Vallabhacarya, Brahman, because of its
miraculous nature, is both with and without attributes; and these attributes are both
different and non-different from the substance. This he has tried to explain rationally while
explai- ning the Siitra.

"Prakasasraya vad, va, tejastvat"42

which tries to explain the nature of attributes on the analogy of the light of the Sun. There
he says that the' light of the Sun is an attribute of the Sun which is the substance. This.

light is different from the Sun. We say that the $un rises and the Sun sets. We never say
that the light rises arid the light sets. Moveover, the light is here, whereas the Sun is far,
far away. These two, the Sun and its light, though different are not as the tree and the
monkey which is on it or as the cage and the bird which is in it. These latter can remain
without each other; but not so the Sun and its light. Something more. This light itself
appears as a substance when we say that the light is intense and the light is dim. Here
intensity and dimness become the attributes of light thus making it to be a substance.
Thus the light of the Sun is not only an attribute but is also a substance. Now, after this
much of close observation, a very material question arises: Should perception decide the
nature of our conception ? Or should conception decide the nature of our perception ?
Which course are we to adopt ? Which course will enrich our knowledge and liberate our
thought ? Like all sane people Sri-Vallabhacarya says that our perception should decide
our conception and not vice versa. We have to accept the things as they are and as they
unmistakably present them- selves to our healthy senses. Why should we shackle
ourselves with our pre-conceptions ? If we want to do so, let us bid good-bye to our ideas
about progress, evolution, and libera- tion, Coming to the point accord.ing to Sri-
Vallabhacarya, the Ultimate Reality has not only attributes but these attributes on the
analogy of the light of the Sun, are both different and non-different from it. Moreover they
are real and not illusory. As we are concerned here with only the general nature of the
attributes of the Ultimate Reality, we need not: concern ourselves with what they are and
how many.

13. Now, we may turn to the fifth aspect. According to this aspect, the Ultimate Reality is
both personal as well as impersonal and the personal aspect thereof repeatedly
incarnates itself. Before considering this aspect at some length, it will be well if our
notions about "personal" and "impersonal" are cleared up.

To do so, take a simple instance of a king and his laws. The king is a person, but his laws
are not. In order to grasp well the difference between what is personal and what is
impersonal, the consideration of the following instance from the life of Abraham Lincoln
will help us a lot. During the Civil War, when, he was the President, a soldier fell asleep
during watch, was caught red-handed, and according to the strict military rules, was
condemned to death. But before his execution, the matter came before Lincoln, who
having enquired into the circumstances pardoned him. The circumstances were as
follows: " For the last twenty-four hours he had to march continuously, so he had no
sleep. The person whose turn it was to be on the watch happened to be sick. The
condemned soldier took pity on him, stood on the watch in his stead, and sent him away
to take rest. Having had no sleep during the last twenty-four hours, and having had to
march continuously during that period, he was completely exhausted, and so fell asleep.
According to the strict military rules this was a serious fault; and execution was the only
punishment for such a serious default. And, but foe Lincoln's intervention, this defaulter
would have met his death. The impersonal laws condemned him. Lincoln a person
pardoned him. The impresonal Jawa were mighty. All the others except the President
were quite helpless before them. Thus these laws though mighty had no mind and no
consequent discrimination, which Lincoln, a person, had. They punished the act without
entering . into the exonerating circumstances. Physical laws governing the universe are
as impersonal a& the military rules, rire burns all alike whether they are adults having
knowledge or infants having no knowledge. That such mighty laws ruthlessly govern the
universe cannot be denied, Now, we may seriously ask a question: is the Ultimate Reality
impersonal like military laws or personal like Lincoln, the President ? It is impersonal like
the military laws, the prayers, the sacrifices, and all such devotional practices that have
existed from times immemorial become altogether meaningless. And it is not mere foolish
blind faith

that have sustaind them throughout. The efficacy of such practices has been proverbial.

"More things are wrought by prayer ."43
So says saintly Tennyson.

"Suneri maine nirbalaka bala Rama :

Pichali sakha bhartim santanaki, ade

Sambhare kama."44

So declares the great poet-devotee Stiradnsa. He here states that God helps the helpless
and adds that he can cite a number of .instances where God has helped persons in dire
needs. "Pray and -your prayer will be granted" is the cardinal doctrine of Christianity. Why
go to the distant past ? Mahatma Gandhi was the living example or such faith. The
combination of the physical laws before which men are helpless and this efficacy of
prayers yields us an Ultimate Reality which is both impersonal ..and personal. Now, the
existence of the impersonal laws in the universe is accepted by all, whether they believe
or do not believe in God. For such, the knowledge of these laws and their non-violation
are the only means to escape punishment. But for the believers in God, God's grace is an
additional means to do so. Sri-Vallabhacarya and, according to him, the Sutrakara also
both believe in the Personal God. In the Sutra :

"Iksater nasabdam"45

The Sutrakara says that the Ultimate Reality has a desire. Again in the Sutra :

"Racananupattesca nanumanam"46

he says that the Ultimate Reality is not devoid of consciousness because there is so
much of law, order, and design In the universe.

As for the Sruti, it clearly declares the Ultimate Reality to be personal in a number of
passages, out of which I cite only two as follows :

"Tad aiksata, 'Bahu syam, prajayeyiti"47

meaning "The Ultimate Reality wished: Let myself be many, let me multiply myself."

"Yam eva esa vrnute tena labhyah"48

meaning "He alone whom God choose can find God." As for the Bhagavadgita, its
Principal Actor, the very preacher, is Personal God himself. The citation of the two
passages where his Gracious nature is quite visible will suffice. They are as follows :

"Sarva-dharman parityajya
Mam ekam Saranam Vraja :

Aham tva sarva-papebhyo
Moksayisyami ma sucah."49

meaning "Leave all talk of, religious duties. Surrender yourself ,to Me. I shall relieve you
from all sins."

"Yada yada hi dharmasya
Glanir bhavati, Bharata;

Abhyuttanam adharmasya
Tadatmanam srjamyaham.

Paritranaya sadhunam,

Vinasaya ca duskrtam;

Dharmasamsthapanathaya
Sambhavami yuge yuge."50

meaning "Whenever justice is in peril and injustice becomes prevalent I incarnate myself
to protect the virtuous and to destroy the wicked. For the sake of restoring justice I incar
nate myself from time." This last passage clearly mentions the repeated incarnation of the
Personal God.

14. Now, we may take up the sixth, and as far as the chapter is concerned, the last
aspect. According to this aspect, all the activity involed in creating this universe and
sustaining it is for this Ultimate Reality a mere sport. The Scriptures in unmista- kable
terms declare that God, i. e., the Ultimate Reality, has created this universe, Now the act
of creation is an activity on the part of God. But, generally any activity has these two
essential features: (I) It is to meet some want, to fulfil some desire that an activity is
undertaken. (2) Every activity involves some hardship. A person having no water in his
house goes to a well. He wants water. And it is to meet this want that he takes the trouble
of going to the well, Turning to God we may legitimately ask: To meet which want of his,
does God create the universe ? Secoodly, if even an ordinary activity entails some,
trouble, what a tremndous amount of trouble would God have had to undergo in creating
so vast and so complex a universe? The first question arises because God being perfect
can have no want; and the second because the trouble entailed by the activity would
curtail the amount of his. joy. To both these questions, the Sutrakara and following him
Sri-Vallabhacarya has but one answer: namely.

"Lokavat tu lrla-Kaivalyam"51

meaning "It is merely a sport on the part of God, like any other sport to be met with in this
world," A sport is something spontaneous, a direct result of overflowing joy. A baby
smiles. Why does it do so ? To meet which want does it do so ? A baby's smile is that
outward result of the inward over- flowing joy. The same is true -of God, God is all-joy, all
overflowing joy. And this creation is the outward expression of the inward oveflowing joy.
And when an activity results from the overflowing joy, the trouble involed is no trouble at -
all because it is not felt as such, It is in this way that the act of creation becomes merel a
matter of sport on the part, of the Ultimate Reality.

15. Thus in the two chapters we have seen that the Ultimate Reality is not only One
without a second, but moreover it has an inherent capacity of becoming Many in all its rich
and infinite variety, that it has actually become Many out of its overflowing joy, that all this
has taken place automatically and without the least inconvenience to the actor, that this
Ultimate Reality has all the divine attributes which are non-different from its substance,
and above all it is endowed with an incompre- hensibly great and mysterious power
whereby it can become anything and it can achieve anything automatically. Now, what
remains to be done is to view It in its relation to the two other sub-categories, the animate
souls and the inanimate objects, the two basic components of this universe of our
experince.

CHAPTER V

TWO SUB-CATEGORIES

1. Not let us consider the two sub-categories, namely, the animate souls and the
inanimate objects. What has gone before may have some mediate concern no doubt. But
these two have immediate concern for us. For one of them we actually are in our present
state and the other constitutes the setting in which we find ourselves. Of these two again,
the first, i. e., the animate souls have direct importance. For they are active participants in
this World-Play. The importance of the other lies in so far as it contributes to the
happiness or otherwise of the first. As our aim in this Thesis is simply to deal with only the
general aspects of any problem, we do not go into details and touch only the salient
points. Now, whatever be the Ultimate Nature of these two categories, it is a patent fact
that the majority of those that belong to the first do not feel fully satisfied in the setting in
which they find themselves. They have a dim vision of, and an unconscious instinctive
drive in, some definite direction. This is happiness. But what constitutes their happiness
they do not know. And this definite ignorance of theirs together with the indefinite urge is
at the root of all the worldly activities, whether economical, social, political, or spiritual.
These souls try their level best to secure the happiness, .of which they have only a dim
vision. Most of them fail to do so. And even those who either wholly or partly succeed .are
again not as happy as they expect to be. For they want more. The poet Shelley's lines :

"We think before and after

And pine for what is not"1

very beautifully describe this condition. After this much general consideration, we may
now turn to the consideration

of what our System of Suddhadvaita Vedanta can contribute in this direction. Let it be
made clear at the outset that it being a spiritual activity, will directly contribute to mental
peace only. Next, we have to consider how it will help us in adjusting ourselves to the
setting in which we find ourselves.

2. Coming to the point, the souls referred to above are either of active or contemplative.
And we find that the majority there of are active, the minority alone being contemplative.
These latter will concentrate on the one thought that the Ultimate Reality has become
these animate souls as wen as the inanimate objects. In the beginning this win be a mere
idea only. But by constant concentration on this one idea, that idea will gather strength
and the sight of everything will in course of time evoke this one idea in his mind, which in
its turn will give rise to ineffable mental peace and even joy. That such a person will
radiate peace and joy all around, we can easily suppose. But being contemplative he will
generally do nothing more. Coming to the active type, we can say that behind all his
activities there will be this one idea animating them all. He will, in course of time, come
instinctively to feel that God or the Ultimate Reality is a Master Organism whereof the
various souls are different organs. The nature of this feeling win be made clear by the
following illustration: Our body is a big organism. Our hands and feet are its various
organs. If a mosquito sits on our foot, our hand instir.ctively reaches it and drives it away.
Our hands and feet are evidently different. Nevertheless, one instinctively runs to the
succour of the other. Why? Because some one and the same entity animates both of
them. The same will be the case with an ardent active follower of this system. To the best
of his ability, he will, in the first place, do no harm to anything whether animate or
inanimate, and in the second place, will run to the succour of others without any
distinction of caste or creed. The lives of Sri-Vallabhacarya and Sri-Vitthalesa were ideal
in this respect. The former

was more contemplative, the latter more active. And this latter is reported to have offerred
to a dying untouchable woman the water that was meant to be offerred to his Deity, As for
their attitude towards inanimate objects, they will be worshippers of beauty and grace
everywhere. The ideal person, according to both Sri- Vallabhacarya and Sri- Vitthalesa, is
one who hurts nothing either animate or inanimate, and tries to the best of his ability, to
please the animate souls and to beautify the inanimate objects. It is in this way that he
realise his ideal according to the System of Suddhadvaita Vedanta. Is this ideal not a
universal one in its application? And dose the System of Suddhadvaita Vedanta not
supply a rational basis for Ideal? This is what I have humbly to place before the general
intelligent public to the best of my ability. But this ability is not mine. It is the liberal gift of
the Almighty All-gracious Ultimate Reality.

100

CHAPTER VI
RECAPITULATION

1. We started by stating that there is nothing bad or dogmatic in Real Religion. If it was
'brought into disrepute, it was so because of the blind fanaticism of its followers. To
condemn Religion, because some of its followers in their false zeal combined with
ignorance happen to have prepetrated the most heinous crimes against humanity in
Religion's name, is equally unwise. Remove this wrong element and have Religion it its
pure form. It is a veritable jewel, a veritable nectar. It is a factor common to all religions.
That is why Mahatma Gandhi has said :

"Though religions are many, Religion is one"l

And this Religion, which respects all religions and all men, ,and which hurts nobody's
feelings, well not only be fully democratic but also completely universal.

2. This ideal Oneness of Religion is not merely a piece of idle pious imagination. It has
sound scientific basis. Complexity confounds us. That is why we hanker after simplicity,
And this simplicity is at the root of things, It is from this 'simplicity that the rich complexity
has come into being. Scientists haVe found it in their heads. Saints have found it in their
hearts. God, or the Ultimate Reality is nothig else but this all comprehensive Master
simplicity Suddhadvaita is but another word for this Master Simplicity.

3. According to the System of Suddhadvaita Vedanta, this Master Simplicity itself has
transformed itself into this vast Complexity without losing nothing of its substance. Gold
does

101

not cease to be gold by becoming an ornament. There is nothing simpler than Unity.
Therefore Master Simplicity is Unity It is this Unity that will satisfy our craving for
simplicity. It is this Unity that will make absolute freedom from fear possible. The ideas of
omniscience, omnipotence, and omni- presence point in the direction of the Unity,
Revelation and Reason both justify this Unity, And this Unity is no more idle talk. We had
amongst us in the past and have even in the present saintly persons who are
embodiments of this Unity in thought, word and deed. And it is by following in their foot¬
steps that we shall have Universal Peace. Saluting them all I conclude this little brochure
of mine. May peace pervade everywhere.

APPENDIX I

PERSONS AND AUTHORS :

{N.B. Most of them are world -renowned)

1. Aurobindo Ghosh

A great seer of our own time

2. Badarayana

The reputed author of the Brahmasutras, at
times referred to as Sutrakara."

3. Baird

Dr. Baird, the Inventor of Television

4. Besant

Dr. Annie Besant, the Great Theosophist

5. Bose

Sir Jagdish Chandra Bose

6. Clarke

A.C. Clarke, a famous British Scientist

7. Einstein

Albert Einstein

8. Gandhi

Mahatma Gandhi

9. Haldane

J.B.S. Haldane, a famous British Scientist

10. Huxley

Aldous Huxley, a famous British Author.

11. Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln

12. Madhva

Sri-Madhvacarya

13. Radhakrishnan

Dr. S. Radhakrishnan

14. Ramakrsna Paramahamsa

An ambodiment of God realization

15. Rama Tirtha

Svami Rama Tirtha

16. Ramanuja

Sri-Ramanujacarya

17. Roosevelt

President Roosevelt

18. Samkara

Sri-Samkaracarya

19. Shelley

P. B. Shelley, a famous English Poet

20. Suradasa

A famous Indian Poet-Saint.

21. Sutrakara

Vide No.2 above.

22. Tennyson

Alfred Tennyson, the Poet Laureate

23. Vallabha

Sri-Vallabhacarya

24. Vivekananda

Swami Vivekananda

25. Vitthalesa

Son of Sri-Vallabhacarya a worthy son of a
worthy father.

104

A.B.A

A.B.T.

A.G.H.M

A. P

B, G
BH.SU

B.S

B,S,A.B

B.S.M.B

B.S.S.B

B. U

C. U.

D. S
G.M
I.U
K.U
KN.U
M.U

P .SAG
P .S.R
R.R.L. V

R. S.H.P

S. L.L
S.R

S. U

T .D.N.I

T. D.N. Ill

T.U
V.DH
W I.L

APPENDIX II

ABBREVIATIONS AND BOOKS:

Annie Besant: Autobiography -Adyar, 1939
Theosophy -People's Book Series

Aurobindo (Ghosh) on Himself and on Mother-Pondicherry,
1953

Antahkarana- Prabodha -A minor work of Sri-Vallabhacarya
Bhagavad-Gita

Bhagavata-Subodhini-Sri- Vallabhacarya's masterly

Commentary on Bhagavata

Brahma-Sutras

Brahma-Sutra-Anubhasya-Sri-Vallabhacarya's Commentary
on B.S.

Brahma-Sutra-Madhvabhasya

Brahma-Sutra-Samkarabhasya

Brhadarayaakopanisad

Chandogyopanisad

Dasa-Sloki- A minor work of Sri-Samkarcarya

Gajendra- Moksa -A Chapter from Maha- bharata

Isavasyopanisad

Kathopanisad

Kenopanisad

Mundakopanisad

M.A. Pandit's "Sadhana in Aurobindo Ghosh"

Pondicherry 1964.

Picked up from Stray Reading and the source where of it was
very difficult to find out.

Romain Rolland's "The Life of Vivekananda" English
Translation, 1965

A. K. Roger's "Student's History of Philosophy" -New York.
1928.

Rgveda

D. C. Sharma's "Learn and Live" - Oxford. 1949
Siddhanta-Rahasya -A minor work of Sri- Vallabhacarya
Svetasvataropanisad

Tattvarthadipa-Nibandha Chapter I Bombay Eddition
*Tattvarthadipa -Nibandha Chapter III Surat Eddition
* A Philosophical Digest by Sri- Vallabhacarya.
Taittiryopanisad

Vivekadhairyasraya -A minor work of Sri- Vallabhacarya
Welton's "Intermediate Logic" -London, 1938.

107

Bhagavata

Bible

Mahabharata
Ramakrishna &
His Disciples
Ramayana

One of the eighteen Puranas, treated by Sri-
Vallabhacarya as the Fourth Prasthana along with
the other three, the Vedas, the Bhagavadgita and the
Brahmasntras.

The Holy Bible

The first great Indian Epic.

A Biographical Work by
Christopher Isherwood.

The second great Indian Epic.

108

APPENDIX III

SOURCES OF QUOTATIONS :

Preface

1. P.S.R

Chapter I

1. P.S.R. 4.

2. P .S.R. S. 5.

3. R.R.L.V. P. 266 6.

Chapter II

1. A.B.A. PP. 238-239

2. A.B.A. PP. 240-241

3. B.S. 2.1.11

4. A.B.A. PP. 438-446

6. S.U. n.23

7. K.U. 2.8

8. C.U. 6.14.2

9. C.U. 6.14

10. B.S. 2.1.27

11. B.S.A.B. 1.1.2
11.. B.S.A.B. 1.1.2

13. B.S.A.B. 1.1.2

14. T.D.N. 1.7-8

15. RV. 1.164.46

16. G.M. 146
17 B.G.9.23

18. P.S.R

19. V.DH 17

20. Tennysons "Charge of the Light
Brigade

21. II. 5

22. B.S.A.B 1.1.2

23. T.D.N 1111.12

24. T.D.N 1.8

25. S.R.2

26. B.S.A.B. 1.2.28

27. M.U.3.1.8

28. K.U. 2.4.1
29 II. 5

109

Chapter III

1. C.U 6.2.1.

2. C.U 6.2.3

3. P.S.R.

4. P.S.R

5. P.S.R.

6. P.S.R.

7. RV. 3.62.10

8. T.D.N. 111.5.1

9. Luke XVII.21 (The Bible)

10. K.U. 2.4.1

11. C.U. 6.2.1-2

12. S.U. 1.1

13. C.U. 6.1.3

14. M.U. 2.2.8

15. B.G. 6.22

16. P.S.R.

17. P.S.R.

18. C.U. 6.2.1

19. B.S.A.B. J.I.2.

20. B.S.S.B. 1.1.2

21. B.S.A.B. 1.1.2

22. B.S.M.B. 2.1.14

23. KN.U. 3

24. B.S. 1.1.3 (or 4)

25. T.U. 2.7.

26. B.G. 16. 1-3

27. B.U. 4.2.4

28. B.U. 4.4.25

29. B.U. 1.4.2

30. B.G. 9.29

31. T.D.N. 1.76

32. P.S.R.

Chapter IV

1. T.D.N. 1..65-72

11. S.L.L. P. 58

2. R.S.H.P. PP. 1-3

12. M.U. 3.1.8

3. T.D.N. 1.70

13. K.U. 2.4.1

4. A.B.T. P. 17

14. M.U. 3.1.8

5. B.U. Santi-Patha

15. K.U. 1.2.15

6. P.S.A.G. P. 9

16. T.U.2.4.9

7. P.S.A.G. PP. 12-14

17. K.U. 4.11

8. T.U. 2.4

18. K.U. 3.15

9. B.G. 7.19

19. C.U. 3.14.2

10. P.S.R.

20. K.U. 2.20

110

21. I.U. 5

37. P.S.R.

22. W I.L. PP. 13-15

38- B.S.A.B. 2.3.42

23. C.U. 6.2.1.

39. B.G. 17.3

24. D.S. 10

40. S.L.L. PP. 50-60

25. S.U. 6.19

41. C.U.6.2.1

26. II. 20

42. B.S. 3.2.28

27. II. 5

43. Tennyson's "The Passing
or Arthur"

28. B.S. 2.1.27

44. P.S.R.

29. C.U. 6.2.1

45. B.S. 1.1.4 (or 5)

30. B.S.A.B. 1.1.1.

46. B.S. 2.2.1

31. B.S.A.B. 1.1.2

47. C.U. 6.2.3

32. B.S. 2.7.27

48. K.U. 2.23

33. C.U. 6.2.1

49. B.G. 18.66

34. C.U. 6.2.3

50. B.G. 4.7-8

35. B.U. 2.5.19

36. C.U. 6.2.1

Chapter V

51. B.S. 2.1.33

1. Shelley's "To a Sky-lark"

Chapter VI

1. P.S.R.

Ill

SUBJECT INDEX

A. C. Clarke 4, 103
A. N. Jani J
A. P. Sinneth S

Abhaya (Fearl-ssness) 54, 61, F

Abraham Lincoln L

Absolute fearlessness 55

Acaryas 6

Vedantacarya V

Vaisnavacarya V

Sankaracarya S

Ramanujacarya R

Madhvacarya

Nimbarkacarya N

Vallabhacarya V

Actor 97

Adage 44

Age golden 41

Agnosticism 65

Agni 52

Ahmedabad 39
Albert Einstein E
Aldous Huxley H
Almighty 52. 83, 100
Altar of revelation 17
Alvlrs 89
Annie Besant B
Annihilation 2t
Anubhasya 32, 53

Aphorism "Badarayan"
Apocryphal 31
Aristotle 76
Aspirant 22, 29. 89
Astronomy 19
Atheism 9, 13
Atheistic platform 13
Atma 38,42
Attitudes 15, 19, 65
Attributes 97

Attribute-1 ess 89. 90. 91,92
Aurobindo Ghosh 9. 15,30.
-33,69,79. 103
Authority 8

Bada Mandir 7
Badarayana Vyas V
-Aphorism 18
-Samadi Bhasa S
-Sutrakar V
Baroda 5
Beasts 51

-biped 25
Behavior 72
religious 24
Belief 4. 72

Orthodox 18, 19, 29. 32. 75
Spiritual 11

113

Believers-orthodox 31
Besant Annie (Dr.) 9, 12, 13.
103, A

Bhagvadglta (Srimad) 18, 43,

54, 58, 88, 95, G

Bhagvata (Srimad) 18, 19, 31

Commentry on-6

Bhatta G. H. 5, G

Bhed

Svagat S

Vijatiya V

Bible 19. 22, 40

Bigotry 17

Biology 73

Biologist 80

Blavatsky H. V. H

Bliss 63, 70, 71

Stale of 41, S

Blood 74

Body 4, 5, 14, 37

God's 82

Bombay 7

Books of revelation 20
Bose J. C. (sir) 46
Bradlaugh Charles C
Brahman 67, 71, 79, 80, 81
Material cause 53
Ultimate reality 77. 78
(its) miraculous nature 91
Brahma Sutra 6, 53
Brahmasutra Bhasya
Anubhasya A
Sarirak .S
Brahmavad 8
Brahmins 39

Brain 9, 14, 74

Buddha Gautam 22, 25, 29

Capacity,

inherent 50
of becoming many 86
Caste 31, 99
Catholic 6
Cause

efficient 58, 63
material 53, 63
instrumental 53
Cells 74
Century 6

Chandogyopanisad 16, 42, U

Character

omnipotent 61

Charls Bradlaugh 9, 12, 13, B
Chargeless 64
Christ Jesus 23, 25, J

-incarnation of God 22
Christians 17, 19, :22, 72
-corollary 23
-era e

Christianity 22, 94
Christopher
Isherwood 6
Civil-war 93

Comprehensive principle-65
Communities 31
Components basic 97
Conception 92
Confidance 15
Conflict 30
of sruti passages 81
among religion 21

114

Conflicting qualities 62
repository of 64
mutual 86

Consciousness 14, 34, 70, 78
98

Constitution of matter 10

Contemplation 100

Contradiction 76, 90

Contribution of religions 25

Conviction 39

Core 72

Creation 50

-time of 34

Her 68

Creator 51

Creature 74

Creed 99

Crimes 101

Cruelty 56, 58, 59

Culture I

Customer 26

Curiosity 55

Death 90

Deity 13

Demons 45

Denizens 58

Devotte 5, 3 I

Dialecticians 89

Dictum-upnisadic 16, 68, 83

Different and non different 92

Differences 45

Dimness 92

Diksitajl (sri) Maharaj 6

Discipline 30, 79

Discord 73

Disease 21
Dislikes 71
Dissolution 34
Distinguished 66
Diversions 38

Diverse -names and forms 62
Divine 15
Divine- Mother 69
Divinity 84
Doctrine-

metaphysical 35, 54
suddhadvait 3
(Pure-Monism) M
Vedantic 35-36, 77
Viruadhadharmasraya 86
Dross 31

Dogmas religious 3
Doubt 24, 27
Doubter 43
Dualism 65
E

Earth 10, 69

Effect doctrine 59

Efficacies 80

Effipient cause 58

Efforts human and divine 88

Electricity 73

Electrons 73

Elements [ofchemistry] 51,73
Emotions 9, 50
Energy 11

Divine 88
Forms of, 73 ..

Haman 88
Entity 25. 44, SI ,
Equality 17

115

Era Christian 6
Ethical 65

Evil 56, 57, 58, 59; 60
Evolution 41
Experience of
Ultimate Reality 15, 28, U
Expression 96
F

Facilities 21
Faith 27, 28, 46, 89
Blind 87
Child like 76
Human Energy 88
In idol 28
In God 16
In Guru 16
Instinctive 90
Intelligent 87, 88
Necessity of 45
Falsehood 69
Famines 21
Fanatics 4, 31
Religious 3
Scientific 3

Fearlessness absolutej55
Feelings 65
Fire 25

Followers Buddha.s 2
Forms divers d
Freedom absolute 61, 102
G

G. H. Bhatta5, B
Gandhi (M. K.) Mahatma M
Gautam Buddha B
Gayatri Mantra 39

Ghosh Aurobindo103A
God 6 28 30 38 40 54 59
61,88, 89, 96
Definition 42
Of actual Experience 29
Belief 29

Absolule authority 18
Almighty 53
Brahman 58

Charge of partiality on 58.
Concept 36
Cosmic creator 9, 53
Eternal reality 19
Everything 72
Formless 23
Governing principle 39
Incarnation of 22 29
Informing power spirit 36
Of Jainism 56
Kingdom of 40
Life, light, love truth 37
Manifestation of 49
Material cause 58
Nature of 35
No two 47
Notion of 44, 66, N
Of scripture

Omnipresent 38
Omnipotent 44,151
Omniscient 44, 51
Only Entity 47, 48, 4!

One without second 41
Personal 41,94
Real substance 49
Self same 51
Supreme good 37

116

Term 12, 48

Triumphant 49

Ultimate reality 34, 47, 48,

53,57,101

Gods

Agni A

Indra I

Gold 51,53, 54, 86, 101
Ingot ornament 86
Goldsmith 51
Good 39

Goodness 44, 45
Grace 38, 88
Divine 15
Infinite 88
Of God 16, 5. 90
Greeks 41
Philosophers 10
Gunas 63
See prakruti guna
Rajas, Satva, Tamas
Guru 15, 16
Guide 15 .

Author's See Bhatt, Jani,

H. v. Blavatsky 13, 14, 90
Haldane J. B. S 74, 89
Happiness 21
Harmony 73
Haughtiness 46
Heart 101

Heaven-denizens of 58
Hell denizens of 58
Hindu 17, 72
Scriptures 22

Hinduism 22, 28, 29
History

Of science and philosophy 8
Hope of universal peace 4,24
Humanity 101
Humllltyl 1
Huxley Aidous A
Hypocrasy 4

Ice 49, 50
Idealism 65
Ideal state soul 55
Idol 29, 84

Ignorance 55, 64, 67, 69, 98;
lllusionism 80
Illusory 92
Imagination 46, 87
-pious 101

Inanimate objects 50
Incarnation 95
Inconsistency logical 89
Indian Religions R
Indra 52.

Ingot 58
Inertia 24, 88
Infidel 23

Infinite 40, 62, 64, 67, 68, 69'
87

Injustice to scriptures 95
Logic 95

Institute oriental O
Institution social 3
Instruments 10
Intellect 50,65
Intelligence 80
Intelligent 38

117

Intensity 92
Intuition 50

Isherwood christo phen C
Islam 22
Isness 71
J

J. D, S. Haldane H
J. C. Bose B
Jani A. N. 6
Japan 2
Joy 34 .

Jesus Christ C
Judgement 9
Justice 95
K

Karma

As action of different soul 59

Kath-upnisad 16, 40

Ken-upnisad 52, 80

Kevaladvaita 54

See: Absolute Monism also

King has laws 93

Knot 43

Krisna Lord 39

Koran 19, 22

Laws

Of king 93
Of Contradiction 87
Of Giving and taking 25
Governing the nature 36
Gravitation 37
Karm 56, 59
Kings 93

Thoughts 10, 76, 78, 87
(fandamental)

Letter 32
Liberation 78
Life 34, 36

Multiform 9
Likes 71

Literatare religious 6
Limitations 84
Lincoln Abraham 93, A
Logic 32, 33, 65, i9, 83
Inconsistance 89
Injustice 84 J
Reasoning 80 .

Logiciants 43
Lord Krisna K
Sankar S
Shiva S
Loss 27
Luxary 88
M

M. S, University (Baroda) 6
Machine 37

Madhavacarya 47, 51,58
and acaryas
Mahabharat 6
Maharaj-Dixitji D
Mahatma Gandhi 27, 36, 37,

38, 39, 40, 41,87, 94, 101.
Manifestation of

Ultimate Reality 64, 67,69, U
Manifoldness 66
Master Musician (God) 67
Master 101
Materialism 23, 65
Mathematics 83, 87
Matters 1,9, 16
Maya 63, 86

118

Mayavada 8
Memory 9
Men 51

Mental peace 99

Mind 3, 40, 70, 74

Microscope 43

Misery 40, 56, 58

Missionaries 17

Militant rule 19

Mohammed the prophet 23

Mohammedans 17, 19, 22, 72

Monism-pure 50

Monist 9

Morass 55

Mortality 21

Mosquito 25, 99

Mother the Divine 69 '

Names-diverse D
Nature 28, 9]

Nectar veritable 101
Neglect of religion 25
Newton 10

Nirdosa see ultimate Reality
Non-different 92; d
Non-dualism 59
Notes-musical 73
Notion of God 44, 66
Objects 13, 40, 74, 79
Inanimate 34, 97, 98, 100
Finite-unreal 69
Obscurity 69
Occult world' 13, 103
Omnigood God) 45
Omnipotent [" ] 45, 83, 88, 102
Almighty 51,83

Omnipotence 58, 83

Omnipresence of God 45, 102

Omniscient God II, 45, 51, 102

One absolutely 77

Without Second 62, 85, 97

Oneness of religion t01

of law governing 36

Opponents 3

Organs 1,8, to, tl

Sense 8, to, 11

Organism 1,51

Oriental institate Baroda 5 I

Origin as single 74

Ovum 74

Pains 51
Pantheism 9, 65
Partiality 56, 59
Parmatman 34
Particles Elementary 11
Passages 35, 82
Peace

After death 21
Mental 22, 25, 54
Universal 102
Peacock 73
Perception 9, 92
Permutation combination 73
Perfect 96
Pioneers 3, 20

Philosophers 8,11,35, 40, 42.
47, 56, 58, 66, 70, 83, 90
Greek 10

Philosophy 2, 7, 9, 10, 38
Vedantic 7
Western 11

119

Physical pains 21
Physicists 10
Pleasure 51
Poison 57

Pot and potter 50, 51
'Power 12, 13, 44, 69
Living 36
Temporal 23

Prakruti Guna G, and R, S,

T in

Preachers 21
President, Roosevelt 59
Principle 37, 43, 72, 76. 78
Problems 81
Profit 27

Progress 31, 40, 41,55
Proffession 23
Proofs 13

Prophet 13, 17, 22, 23
Mohammed in
Psychological 65
Entities 50
Psychology 69
Purpose 70
Pure Monism 50, M
Pursuit intellectual 65
Q

Quotient 87

Quotations Quotation Index
R

Radhakrishan S. (Dr) 4, 38, 39
Rational basis 100
Rajas Guna 63
Ramanujacarya 5, 58, 60, 81,
82, 84

Ramkrishana

Paramhansa (swami) 11,29.
84

Raman C. V. (sir) 39
Reason 15, 16, 32. 73, 102
Reality 43, 69, 71,86
Ultimate see U
Realism 86
Realisation of God 89
Recapitulation 101 '
Reproduction, 74
Religion 2, 3, 4, 5, 20. 24, 29,
67, 71,71, 101
Contribution of
Conflict of
Religionist 24, 42
Religious persons 3
Religions 4, 17
Relations 26

Revelation 8, 17, 49, 70, 73
102 ,

Altar of 55 In lies
Romain Rolland 1
Roosevelt, Presideut 54
S

Saints 22, 28,42: 101
Sadltman 70
Sadhak 15
Sages 14
Sajattiya 63 ,

Sakti 22
Satva Guna 63
Scriptures 80
Sen salion 65
Second 91
Secret of success 2

120

Self 23
Self same 50
Seva 88
Simplicity 102
Sincerity 4
Sinneth A. P 13, 103
Siva 22

Souls 4, 5, 14, 35,37, 38, 56,
68

Animate 34, 50, 97, 98
Ideal state 55
Inspired 14
Non Sentient 64
Sentient 64

Sruti 9, 35, 54, 71,77, 78
Conflict of

Passages 79, 81,82., 95
State of revelation 83
Steam 49, 50
Substance-ultimate 4
Inanimate 50

Suddhadvaita 10, 34, 35, 50,
54

Vedanta 58, 60, 99, 100,101
Sun 69, 92
Surdasa 38, 94
Sutra 79

Sutrakar 78,79, 81,82,83,
91,94

Badarayan Vyas 13
Surrender 15
Unconditional 27
Svetlsvataropnisad 16, 42
Svetketu 42
Svetketupakhyan 42
System

Religious 5
Theological 35
Vedantic philosophy 6
Swami

Ramkrisna Paramhansa R
Ramtirth R
Vivekanand V

Tamas 9, 63

Tattvadip Nibandha 18, 31,63

Teachers religious 21

Television 2

Theism 65

Theist 41,56

Theory 10, 59

Thief 26

Trust 15

Truth 29, 32

Ultimate Entity 50
Nature 98

" Principle 8, 12, 13,
22, 39, 43

Ultimate Reality 16, 32,33,34.
35, 42, 49, 50, 67, 77, 78,

79, 80, 82, 83, 85, 86, 89,

92, 94, 95, 96, 97.

As god 71

become many 72, 74
Eternal truth 63
Feminine aspect 68
Impartial 79
Independant 63
Master 99
Master musician 67
Nirdosh 56

121 .

Omnipotent 0, 65

One without second 62, 78

Source of strength 73

V .Visualized 69

Vallabhacarya 5, 8, 9, 18, 19,
28, 29, 31,34, 35, 39, 47,

51,53, 58, 59, 63, 64, 66,

67, 69, 70, 82, 83, 84, 85,

86, 87, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94,

96, 99, 100
Arrival at doctrine 35
V's Attitude 32
Belief 30
" Bhasya 17
" Dictum 50

" Direct Descendants 6, 7
Faith 88
Justification 89
Minor work 6, 105, A. P.

106 S R 107 D. H
Philosopher 48
Philosophical tenents 7
Vedantacarya 6,8 56 58
Vaishnava 5
Vedic 77

Vedas 18,22, 29,30, 32t 33
50

Authority 18, 42,47, 49,89
Vayu 52

Veneration 72
Vested interest 23
View rational 16, 36,

Vijatiya 63, 9

Viruddha dharma sraya 84
Vishvamitra 39
Vital 37

Vitthalesa (sri) 99, loo
Vivekanand (swami) 5t 11,22.
84 .

Votaries 89
Vyas, Badarayan 'B.

Wars 21

Water 49, 50

Weakness 22, 30

Woman of exquisite beauty 52

{UmD: Hemvati Kenopanisadt

Will 50, 56

Words eternal 29, 32

World modification

of U. Reality 54

Play .98

Worship 72

You 24
Yogins 24
Z

Zeal false 101 F
Zero 87

122

INDEX OF INALATIONS

Acintya khalu 83 111/30
Atati vyapnoti 38
Atmasrster na Vaisamyam 59

Auml Brahmavadino Vadanti
42.

Bhidyate hrdaya granthi 43
Buddhi Prerak 39
C-D-E

Ekameva 78,91
F. G, I. J, K
Kascid dirah 40, 75
Kasthe na vidyate 72
Katham asatah satj!yeta 86
L

Lokavat tu Lilakaivalyam 96

Nagner hi t!po 60
Na Caksusa 75
Napi vac! 75
Na caikam 77
Niskalam-niskriyam 79
P

Paratantro hyapeksate 52
Prakasasraye 91

Prayatna Paryantam 88
S

Sad eva Saumya 35, 47, 77
81 85 90

Sa atmanam 53
Samoham sarva 58
Sarvabhave samarth 50
Sarva dharm 95
Sraddhamayo.yam 88
Srutes tu 79~ 83
Svetketo 42
Suneri maine. .38
T

Tad aikata 35, 85,95
Tad dure 76

Tad ha eka 41

Vasudev sarvam

Yada95

Yam labdhva 43
Yato vacho 70

The source may be referrerred
from the page numbers given
here

123

PROVERBS AND NUMINOUS

But the same religion 2, 109
A Faith cannot 4, 109
The First Step 9
Get on or Get out 26
God has Sent 6. 109
God helps the helpless 39
I

I accept all religious 5, 109
It is not the human. ..15, 30
defects of Guru
It is faith that steers 27
It in not wisdom 46
I give this example show how
thing works 33
Knowledge is power 44
Little learning 46
Man first looks out 35
More things 94

Necessity knows no laws 26
No trusting 10, 27, 46
A Person 16

Parable of blind & lame 44
Proceeding to search 12
Salutation to any form 22
Substance is one 22
There is an indefinable 36
There is not to reason why 30
Thus was child's play 14
Though religions many 101
Variety is the species of life
12

We think before 98
Where everything fails 28
Worshippers of any deity 22
Sources may be referred from
the page numbers given here

124

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Pushtimarg"

See other formats